PDA

View Full Version : The Jake's not to blame thread...


Pages : [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7

Taco John
01-24-2005, 09:20 PM
apparently some people are bound and determined to blame the qb despite that clearly not being the issue.


Despite the qb "<i>clearly</i>" not being the issue? Are you kidding me?

You don't throw a league leading 20 interceptions in a season and get away scott free with "clearly" not being the issue. And if throwing 20 INTs isn't a problem, then what is?

Jake OWNS each and every interception he throws. Nobody else owns them. Jake owns them.

I gave Brian Griese the benefit of a doubt because his blind side protection was a back-up center converted into a left tackle, and by mid-season his receiving corpse wat thinner than Pat Bowlen's hair, using 7th and 8th string guys. Jake has none of these excuses. He's got great protection. He's got great mobility. He's got a good receiving crew to work with, though he could use that elusive third wide-out... but it's gotten nowhere near as bad as what Griese had to work with some Novembers.

But this isn't about what Griese had or didn't have. This isn't about, and shouldn't be about Griese at all. This is about Jake.

I don't believe we're going to win a Superbowl with him. I can't watch game after game of inconsistent ball and just homer it up that all these turnovers don't matter. They do! They cost us momentum. They cost us game plans. They cost us points. And they eventually cost us seasons.

I get it if you like Jake. He's a hell of a likable guy. But don't tell me that he's "clearly" not the problem. That's just homer talk. He CLEARLY has problems. He's leading the league in interceptions. That is CLEARLY a problem.

I think he's as steady a caretaker as money can buy. A fallback to the Craig Morton days. He'll go out of Denver with a favorable memory. But unless something drastic happens up in his head, it won't be as a champion. That's just my feeling based on the two years that we've seen. Maybe the third year's a charm. I wish that his contract was structured so that we'd find out if it is before we had to commit many more years to a guy who still hasn't proven that he's left his Arizona problems behind.

DB-Freak
01-24-2005, 09:34 PM
No, I dont really see Jake as the problem.

I see him as a victim who is being brought down with him.

Jake clearly has his faults, but I dont consider him at fault for this disappointing season.

We have too many faults to point at one guy.

DBroncos4life
01-24-2005, 09:36 PM
I always thought the game wasn't bigger then one player. ??? Teams win and teams lose.

Popps
01-24-2005, 09:46 PM
I can't blame anyone for being down on Jake. He had an up and down season. But, no one can challenge me when I say that the team let HIM more than the other way around... much more. Jake had a bad game at San Diego. Aside from that, he played pretty well all season long. He also tends to play his best ball during crunch time.

He moves our offense very well. But, if you're looking for a Mike Vick type, he's not the guy. He's not going to take the team on his back. But, he clearly did enough to get us into the playoffs. If we wouldn't have pi$$ed away a couple of games that he put us in position to win, we would have won the division.

I DO see us winning a championship with Jake, but I can see why people would doubt him. He's not perfect. But, give us a fking defense that can keep us in games, and he'll make big plays when he has to. This team should be built around a running game and a defense. There are only a few hall of fame caliber QBs in the league right now and we're not lucky enough to have one. But I do believe we have a guy with enough heart and skills to get the job done.

DB-Freak
01-24-2005, 09:48 PM
Franchise QB dont grow on trees.

Aside from the Seahawks, We had the highest number of dropped balls in the AFC.
And compare that to the other teams deep in the playoffs.

http://snap.stats.com/stats/nflinfo/tmleaders.asp?year=O&type=NFL+Receiving&rank=232&Submit=Go

Its rather symbolic.

Taco John
01-24-2005, 09:49 PM
He also tends to play his best ball during crunch time.

I don't know about crunch time... Seems to me he plays his best ball when the game is already on its way to being a lost cause.

And to the people saying it's about team, and not about Jake... I recognize that there are problems elsewhere on the team. But that doesn't do anything to address Jake's problems that are in his head.

Taco John
01-24-2005, 09:50 PM
Aside from the Seahawks, We had the highest number of dropped balls in the AFC.


Doesn't that speak a little about the accuracy of the balls being thrown?

The Big E
01-24-2005, 09:51 PM
Despite the qb "<i>clearly</i>" not being the issue? Are you kidding me?

You don't throw a league leading 20 interceptions in a season and get away scott free with "clearly" not being the issue. And if throwing 20 INTs isn't a problem, then what is?

Jake OWNS each and every interception he throws. Nobody else owns them. Jake owns them.

I gave Brian Griese the benefit of a doubt because his blind side protection was a back-up center converted into a left tackle, and by mid-season his receiving corpse wat thinner than Pat Bowlen's hair, using 7th and 8th string guys. Jake has none of these excuses. He's got great protection. He's got great mobility. He's got a good receiving crew to work with, though he could use that elusive third wide-out... but it's gotten nowhere near as bad as what Griese had to work with some Novembers.

But this isn't about what Griese had or didn't have. This isn't about, and shouldn't be about Griese at all. This is about Jake.

I don't believe we're going to win a Superbowl with him. I can't watch game after game of inconsistent ball and just homer it up that all these turnovers don't matter. They do! They cost us momentum. They cost us game plans. They cost us points. And they eventually cost us seasons.

I get it if you like Jake. He's a hell of a likable guy. But don't tell me that he's "clearly" not the problem. That's just homer talk. He CLEARLY has problems. He's leading the league in interceptions. That is CLEARLY a problem.

I think he's as steady a caretaker as money can buy. A fallback to the Craig Morton days. He'll go out of Denver with a favorable memory. But unless something drastic happens up in his head, it won't be as a champion. That's just my feeling based on the two years that we've seen. Maybe the third year's a charm. I wish that his contract was structured so that we'd find out if it is before we had to commit many more years to a guy who still hasn't proven that he's left his Arizona problems behind.
Everyone has their opinion on Jake. What I want to know is whether or not you consulted with Bob to prepare your avatar. If you're down on the guy, fine, but why act like a frickin' Chef fan about it? Sorry, but it's really gotten under my skin.

DB-Freak
01-24-2005, 09:55 PM
Doesn't that speak a little about the accuracy of the balls being thrown?
maybe so or maybe not taco, but truthfully if when you get hands on the balls you catch it. Good WRs do that. But then again those are good WRs who do their jobs.

orange 4 life
01-24-2005, 10:05 PM
i dont even know what to say anymore.

ive gone through the issue so many times and you people just dont want to see it.

okay, one more time.

1) he proved a year ago that he can play relatively mistake free football if given favorable circumstances.
2) nothing he did in arizona matters.
3) his int.% this year was identical to vick and roethlisberger, two qb's who's teams were in the conference championships.
4) his 20 int's were coupled with bronco record 27 td's and 4000+ yards passing
5) we lost mccaffrey (obviously not a huge loss, but still MUCH better at #3 if healthy than darius "cant catch the important one yet" watts), sharpe, and portis.
6) because of those losses, the media and fans BOTH said we'd be lucky to finish middle of the pack. we finished top 5.
7) we retooled the line, and are getting manhandled on the interior, which is affecting our ability to run in the redzone and contributing to an inordinate number of passes being batted down at the line.
8) jake does NOT "own" all the interceptions. sorry pal, but hitting his own receivers in BOTH hands is all he can do. remember san diego? the passes to carswell and putzier are "owned" by those two receivers, since THEY are the SOLE reason those passes were intercepted.
9) interception TOTALS are a reflection of pass attempts. the reason roethlisberger had less int's and the same % is that he threw less passes. he was behind less often, and in obvious passing situations less often.
10) our defense was by and large quite good, but flat fell apart in a few games which contributed to us having to pass most every down. remember atlanta? remember how many times we ran in the second half?
11) our special teams let us down all season, which of course means we played on longer fields consistently.
12) our defense had key injuries to pryce, ellis, walls, and middlebrooks, and wasnt deep enough to recover. make all the excuses you want, but there is NO excuse for giving up 35 points in ONE HALF.
13) examine the games we lossed, and see the REALITY of WHY we lost.

a)we lost to jville because griffin fumbled, or because shanny chose to run that last fateful play. take your pick, but it wasnt plummers fault. true, the defense won that game, but when the game was on the line jake got us in position to win
b)we lost to oakland because our defense friggin collapsed in the 4th quarter, and/or because watts couldnt catch a perfectly thrown pass in the endzone. take your pick, but with the game on the line jake got us in position to win.
c) we lost to san diego because carswell and putzier tipped perfectly thrown passes to the defense, because we called that play from the five, and ultimately because watts once again couldnt catch the pass that wouldve erased the int and put us in field goal position to win the game. part of the blame on plummer for choosing the fade pass, but more on the int's (that the receivers "owned") and the dropped pass.

what wouldve happened had those games gone our way?
we wouldve won the division, played at home, never seen indy in the playoffs, and who knows?
all that WITH the key injuries on defense.

saying we cant win with plummer is BLATANTLY and CLEARLY ridiculous.
look at reality.

jake

ps- incidentally, we wouldve won with morton were it not for SIX friggin turnovers and a butch johnson td catch that wouldve been overturned if replay was in effect. just thought you should know that. so much for that analogy huh?

orange 4 life
01-24-2005, 10:08 PM
I can't blame anyone for being down on Jake. He had an up and down season. But, no one can challenge me when I say that the team let HIM more than the other way around... much more. Jake had a bad game at San Diego. Aside from that, he played pretty well all season long. He also tends to play his best ball during crunch time.

He moves our offense very well. But, if you're looking for a <a href="http://www.nfl.com/players/playerpage/235253" target="_blank"><a href="http://www.nfl.com/players/playerpage/235253" target="_blank">Michael Vick</a></a> type, he's not the guy. He's not going to take the team on his back. But, he clearly did enough to get us into the playoffs. If we wouldn't have pi$$ed away a couple of games that he put us in position to win, we would have won the division.

I DO see us winning a championship with Jake, but I can see why people would doubt him. He's not perfect. But, give us a fking defense that can keep us in games, and he'll make big plays when he has to. This team should be built around a running game and a defense. There are only a few hall of fame caliber QBs in the league right now and we're not lucky enough to have one. But I do believe we have a guy with enough heart and skills to get the job done.

im overjoyed.
thank God at least some people get it.
at least some people can see reality.

that ANYONE see's it differently is flat out mind boggling.

well said as usual popps!!

Taco John
01-24-2005, 10:08 PM
Everyone has their opinion on Jake. What I want to know is whether or not you consulted with Bob to prepare your avatar. If you're down on the guy, fine, but why act like a frickin' Chef fan about it? Sorry, but it's really gotten under my skin.


I'm only doing what I've done since I started doing this stuff... If people can't gut it up and take it for what it's worth, that's on them. It's just my visual editorial. If Drew Litton can do it...


http://orangemane.com/images/IMAGE_MAIN/GFC.jpg

http://orangemane.com/Images/misc/patchdefense.jpg

http://orangemane.com/images/IMAGE_MAIN/Raider%20Uglies/raiders2.jpg

http://orangemane.com/images/IMAGE_MAIN/alleak.jpg

http://orangemane.com/images/IMAGE_MAIN/bandwagon.jpg

http://orangemane.com/images/IMAGE_MAIN/chuckyandal.jpg

http://orangemane.com/images/IMAGE_MAIN/TDandElmo.jpg



No, I didn't ask Bob for permission...

Taco John
01-24-2005, 10:09 PM
im overjoyed.
thank God at least some people get it.
at least some people can see reality.

that ANYONE see's it differently is flat out mind boggling.

well said as usual popps!!



You've got to be kidding me. :kiddingme

DB-Freak
01-24-2005, 10:09 PM
i dont even know what to say anymore.

ive gone through the issue so many times and you people just dont want to see it.

okay, one more time.

1) he proved a year ago that he can play relatively mistake free football if given favorable circumstances.
2) nothing he did in arizona matters.
3) his int.% this year was identical to vick and roethlisberger, two qb's who's teams were in the conference championships.
4) his 20 int's were coupled with bronco record 27 td's and 4000+ yards passing
5) we lost mccaffrey (obviously not a huge loss, but still MUCH better at #3 if healthy than darius "cant catch the important one yet" watts), sharpe, and portis.
6) because of those losses, the media and fans BOTH said we'd be lucky to finish middle of the pack. we finished top 5.
7) we retooled the line, and are getting manhandled on the interior, which is affecting our ability to run in the redzone and contributing to an inordinate number of passes being batted down at the line.
8) jake does NOT "own" all the interceptions. sorry pal, but hitting his own receivers in BOTH hands is all he can do. remember san diego? the passes to carswell and putzier are "owned" by those two receivers, since THEY are the SOLE reason those passes were intercepted.
9) interception TOTALS are a reflection of pass attempts. the reason roethlisberger had less int's and the same % is that he threw less passes. he was behind less often, and in obvious passing situations less often.
10) our defense was by and large quite good, but flat fell apart in a few games which contributed to us having to pass most every down. remember atlanta? remember how many times we ran in the second half?
11) our special teams let us down all season, which of course means we played on longer fields consistently.
12) our defense had key injuries to pryce, ellis, walls, and middlebrooks, and wasnt deep enough to recover. make all the excuses you want, but there is NO excuse for giving up 35 points in ONE HALF.
13) examine the games we lossed, and see the REALITY of WHY we lost.

a)we lost to jville because griffin fumbled, or because shanny chose to run that last fateful play. take your pick, but it wasnt plummers fault. true, the defense won that game, but when the game was on the line jake got us in position to win
b)we lost to oakland because our defense friggin collapsed in the 4th quarter, and/or because watts couldnt catch a perfectly thrown pass in the endzone. take your pick, but with the game on the line jake got us in position to win.
c) we lost to san diego because carswell and putzier tipped perfectly thrown passes to the defense, because we called that play from the five, and ultimately because watts once again couldnt catch the pass that wouldve erased the int and put us in field goal position to win the game. part of the blame on plummer for choosing the fade pass, but more on the int's (that the receivers "owned") and the dropped pass.

what wouldve happened had those games gone our way?
we wouldve won the division, played at home, never seen indy in the playoffs, and who knows?
all that WITH the key injuries on defense.

saying we cant win with plummer is BLATANTLY and CLEARLY ridiculous.
look at reality.

jake

ps- incidentally, we wouldve won with morton were it not for SIX friggin turnovers and a butch johnson td catch that wouldve been overturned if replay was in effect. just thought you should know that. so much for that analogy huh?
Loss of SHannon and Portis might attribute to that. Relatively young and raw WRs with a WR who is getting rather old.

orange 4 life
01-24-2005, 10:10 PM
Doesn't that speak a little about the accuracy of the balls being thrown?

ummm, no.

see, thats why theyre called DROPPED balls.
see, that implies that the balls were thrown well and then DROPPED, hence the phrase DROPPED balls!!!

orange 4 life
01-24-2005, 10:16 PM
You've got to be kidding me. :kiddingme

holy Mary Mother of God!!!

READ THE POST.
mine and popps'!!

do you actually dispute whats said?

if so, get your head examined with everyone else who agrees with you.

unbelievable.

Bob's your Information Minister
01-24-2005, 10:16 PM
What I want to know is whether or not you consulted with Bob to prepare your avatar.

All I can say is....

DANCE, FLAVA CLOWN, DANCE!

DB-Freak
01-24-2005, 10:18 PM
All I can say is....

DANCE, FLAVA CLOWN, DANCE!
LMFAO!!!!!!!!!!! LOL Hilarious! Hilarious! Ha! Ha! ROFL! ROFL! rofl rofl

DBroncos4life
01-24-2005, 10:21 PM
ummm, no.

see, thats why theyre called DROPPED balls.
see, that implies that the balls were thrown well and then DROPPED, hence the phrase DROPPED balls!!!


Pretty much dropped balls come down to the BALL hitting the WR's HANDS then them dropping the ball. Otherwise known as something that could have been caught. Look at it this way right is to wrong like caught is to _ _ _ _ _ _ _

Taco John
01-24-2005, 10:30 PM
1) he proved a year ago that he can play relatively mistake free football if given favorable circumstances.


He proved last year that if he's on the shortest leash Shanahan can possibly put on him, he can manage a game for us... Unfortunately, he was injured in all of the games against our toughest opponents in the middle stretch, so we weren't able to see what he could do against those teams.

But who cares what he showed a year ago? What have you done for me lately? Jake still has more to prove than he doesn't.



2) nothing he did in arizona matters.

It matters just as much as what he proved a year ago doesn't it? Actually, what happened to Jake in Arizona does matter, because it's part of his history. You can look at the things he did then and compare them with the things he does now. Which are a lot of the same things...



3) his int.% this year was identical to vick and roethlisberger, two qb's who's teams were in the conference championships.

Jake wasn't in a Conference Championship, though. And he certainly wasn't the quarterback that either Vick or Roethlisberger are. I'm not sure this point really means anything.


4) his 20 int's were coupled with bronco record 27 td's and 4000+ yards passing

Right alongside every other quarterback who's numbers were up due to the rule changes. (http://www.nfl.com/news/story/7953768) The old records don't mean as much as they did. When Dan Marino's NFL record, and John Elway's franchise record are matched or broken in the same season, there's something more going on.


5) we lost mccaffrey (obviously not a huge loss, but still MUCH better at #3 if healthy than darius "cant catch the important one yet" watts), sharpe, and portis.

We lost McCaffrey years ago. How is this even an issue in the Jake era? Jake's got Rod and Lelie. That's more than Brian really ever had throughout his tenure here, since Ed was injured in 2001.


6) because of those losses, the media and fans BOTH said we'd be lucky to finish middle of the pack. we finished top 5.

Not sure what this means.

7) we retooled the line, and are getting manhandled on the interior, which is affecting our ability to run in the redzone and contributing to an inordinate number of passes being batted down at the line.

Whatever. We didn't get manhandled on the interior. That's where we had our biggest problems, sure. But overall, we've had a very solid offensive line. Jake has little he can blame on these guys for.


8) jake does NOT "own" all the interceptions. sorry pal, but hitting his own receivers in BOTH hands is all he can do. remember san diego? the passes to carswell and putzier are "owned" by those two receivers, since THEY are the SOLE reason those passes were intercepted.

The pass to Putzier was on Jake. It was a poorly thrown ball, and Putz had to reach to grab it. When your quarterback consistently leads his receivers too far, he will also consistently see those balls get tipped for interceptions. It's a problem I doubt we'll ever see go away, as it's one Jake has always had throughout his career. It didn't just develop this year. He's always had this tendancy.


9) interception TOTALS are a reflection of pass attempts. the reason roethlisberger had less int's and the same % is that he threw less passes. he was behind less often, and in obvious passing situations less often.

It doesn't change the fact that Jake is throwing them like old men handing out hard candy in church. He's a guy that other teams can literally game plan that they'll get at least one pick a game from. They literally can count on it.


10) our defense was by and large quite good, but flat fell apart in a few games which contributed to us having to pass most every down. remember atlanta? remember how many times we ran in the second half?

Whatever problems we have on the defensive side of the ball says nothing to why Jake leads his receivers too far, throws so many interceptions, and struggles to make things happen when he's forced to throw from the pocket.


11) our special teams let us down all season, which of course means we played on longer fields consistently.

Indeed.

12) our defense had key injuries to pryce, ellis, walls, and middlebrooks, and wasnt deep enough to recover. make all the excuses you want, but there is NO excuse for giving up 35 points in ONE HALF.

There's also no excuse for going three and out after the defense intercepts the ball in a playoff game.


saying we cant win with plummer is BLATANTLY and CLEARLY ridiculous.


I think we can win some games with him. I don't think we're going to win many Championship round games with him. He's a liability in the clutch.


look at reality.

I believe that I am. I'm not denying that Jake had a past in Arizona. I'm not denying that he is the interception leader in the NFL right now. I'm not denying that he leads his receivers. I'm not denying that he struggles mightily in the pocket. And I'm not denying that I'm disappointed in what we've got to show for him after two years.

The reality is, Jake hasn't blossomed into what we all hoped he would. He's still making the mistakes that he made in Arizona. He's a liability to a ball control gameplan, which is the foundation of Shanahan's offense. You can't turn the ball over like Trent Green at Deltha O'neal's birthday party all season long and expect that it'll all be ok.

ps- incidentally, we wouldve won with morton were it not for SIX friggin turnovers and a butch johnson td catch that wouldve been overturned if replay was in effect. just thought you should know that. so much for that analogy huh?

The point was, we didn't win with Morton, so the analogy is good. But incidentally, it's nice to learn that it wasn't Morton's fault either.

Taco John
01-24-2005, 10:31 PM
ummm, no.

see, thats why theyre called DROPPED balls.
see, that implies that the balls were thrown well and then DROPPED, hence the phrase DROPPED balls!!!


I saw a lot of dropped balls that were thrown poorly, and it was lucky the receiver stretched out enough to at least get a hand on it.

DB-Freak
01-24-2005, 10:36 PM
Please, that happens to every WRs.

The fact that is we have a **** load of dropped balls and I have seen too many catchable passes being dropped at clutch moments and not.

I cant remember the countless times the WRs Montana and Elway had making those catches.

Then again those were WRs who did their jobs and were good.

DB-Freak
01-24-2005, 10:38 PM
Ball controll offense TJ?

What happens when that running games becomes a liability? Maybe you should check out the games we lost. Look clearly at the rushing stats and the how the D did.

Seriously

Taco John
01-24-2005, 10:39 PM
Please, that happens to every WRs.

The fact that is we have a **** load of dropped balls and I have seen too many catchable passes being dropped at clutch moments and not.

I cant remember the countless times the WRs Montana and Elway had making those catches.

Then again those were WRs who did their jobs and were good.


How many times did Jake throw a ball that was too far for Rod to catch? If it was all the young guys having this problem, you might have something. But since it's everyone, young and veteran alike, I think we might need to look at it as a symptom of another problem.

Taco John
01-24-2005, 10:39 PM
Ball controll offense TJ?

What happens when that running games becomes a liability? Maybe you should check out the games we lost. Look clearly at the rushing stats and the how the D did.

Seriously



Then you're laying it on Shanahan for trading Portis then?

Taco John
01-24-2005, 10:42 PM
Ball controll offense TJ?

What happens when that running games becomes a liability? Maybe you should check out the games we lost. Look clearly at the rushing stats and the how the D did.

Seriously



Also, I'm sure that if I look at these games that you're talking about, I'll find that Jake was playing up to Championship calibre football, and was just having to deal with all of his idiot teammates who weren't making it happen for him, right?

DB-Freak
01-24-2005, 10:44 PM
How many times did Jake throw a ball that was too far for Rod to catch? If it was all the young guys having this problem, you might have something. But since it's everyone, young and veteran alike, I think we might need to look at it as a symptom of another problem.

Can you clearly point out how many times? Its an overstatement that cant be clearly backed up first of all. These dropped balls are balls that have been touched by the WRs hands TJ. A lot of these were catchable balls.

DB-Freak
01-24-2005, 10:45 PM
Also, I'm sure that if I look at these games that you're talking about, I'll find that Jake was playing up to Championship calibre football, and was just having to deal with all of his idiot teammates who weren't making it happen for him, right?

What are you talking about?

The team has let down and its not only Jake TAco.

Taco John
01-24-2005, 10:48 PM
Can you clearly point out how many times? Its an overstatement that cant be clearly backed up first of all. These dropped balls are balls that have been touched by the WRs hands TJ. A lot of these were catchable balls.


Is this your way of denying that it ever happened? We all know that we saw Rod reaching for balls more than once.

It's not like I want to distrust Jake. It's that he's earned it. It's up to him to earn it back. But I'm not going to go Beckyj4 on him. He's proven to be a liability due to his inconsitency in the pocket and tendancy to turn the ball over. He's got a lot to prove to make up for these shortcomings of his own.

Taco John
01-24-2005, 10:49 PM
What are you talking about?

The team has let down and its not only Jake TAco.


You're right that it's not only Jake. But since he touches the ball on every down, he's a big part of it.

ZachKC
01-24-2005, 10:52 PM
Do you guys remember when he threw one of those INTs in Arrowhead...I don't think there was a WR within 10 or 15 ft where he threw...good thing our defenders were not close to the Den WRs because he threw it right to a Chiefs. I could not believe that play. It was an amazing interception. I literally had no clue what he was trying to do. I know this is only one play from one game but wow. It was astonishing.

DB-Freak
01-24-2005, 10:54 PM
You're right that it's not only Jake. But since he touches the ball on every down, he's a big part of it.
Not really.

Considering how many times other facets of the game failed and collasped, I think he did a pretty good job.

He lost the SD game. But the rushing game nor the D werent really up to it either Taco.

Jake has pulled through some tough times. Liability would be someone who loses games for us.

Jake hasnt really done that.

Bob's your Information Minister
01-24-2005, 10:57 PM
Do you guys remember when he threw one of those INTs in Arrowhead...I don't think there was a WR within 10 or 15 ft of a Bronco WR...good thing our defenders were not close to the Den WRs because he threw it right to a Chiefs. I could not believe that play. It was an amazing interception. I literally had no clue what he was trying to do. I know this is only one play from one game but wow. It was astonishing.

The receiver ran the wrong route. Plummer was expecting Lelie to come back to the ball.

Whether that was Plummer's fault or Lelie's...only Shanahan knows.

DBroncos4life
01-24-2005, 11:01 PM
The receiver ran the wrong route. Plummer was expecting Lelie to come back to the ball.

Whether that was Plummer's fault or Lelie's...only Shanahan knows.



Plummer like most qb's threw the ball to a spot. Lelie kept running. Plummer wasnt the only QB to make a pass like that and look really bad. QB's are taught to throw to a spot not to a wr. Im shocked that Bob has to point this out to another KC fan.

ZachKC
01-24-2005, 11:01 PM
The receiver ran the wrong route. Plummer was expecting Lelie to come back to the ball.

Whether that was Plummer's fault or Lelie's...only Shanahan knows.
I remember looking over at my buddy it such amazement.

Before the game he said the Chiefs would win 42-17. I looked at him laughing. I thought they would win a really close one. Prob OT. He didnt end up being to far off.

DBroncos4life
01-24-2005, 11:04 PM
I remember looking over at my buddy it such amazement.

Before the game he said the Chiefs would win 42-17. I looked at him laughing. I thought they would win a really close one. Prob OT. He didnt end up being to far off.



I knew Denver was done when they said they wanted to slow the game down. I haven't heard our coaches say those words and have Denver win the game. Never take a knife to a gun fight.

Taco John
01-24-2005, 11:06 PM
All I can say is that I'm looking toward the future, and I hope Shanahan is doing the same and will bring in a couple of young quarterbacks to compete and push Jake. I haven't given up on Jake entirely, but I've lost pretty much any confidence I had built up from the season before. As it is now, I look at him as a caretaker quarterback. It'll be up to him to elevate his game enough to bump up that status. Hopefully, he's not doing like you guys, and blaming it on everybody else.

ZachKC
01-24-2005, 11:08 PM
I knew Denver was done when they said they wanted to slow the game down. I haven't heard our coaches say those words and have Denver win the game. Never take a knife to a gun fight.
Keep doubting Eddie K.

It was a fun day at Arrowhead. Aside from the game I spend time with a lot of old friends I had not been able to see for a long time because we go to college in different palces.

I will never forget at twords the end of the game we spotted a few open seats at the front row and the Chiefs were on about the 20 going in with Todd Collins at QB. Someone either called a timeout or it was TV timeout and during the break they replayed all of the good plays by the Chiefs on the huge board with audio. It seemed really loud. Every single one of Denver's defenders had their hands on their hips and were looking up watching the plays. Just kind of an interesting site that stuck with me.

Needa Pass Rush
01-24-2005, 11:09 PM
Safe to say TJ won't be changing his handle to Taco Jake anytime soon. ;D

DBroncos4life
01-24-2005, 11:09 PM
All I can say is that I'm looking toward the future, and I hope Shanahan is doing the same and will bring in a couple of young quarterbacks to compete and push Jake. I haven't given up on Jake entirely, but I've lost pretty much any confidence I had built up from the season before. As it is now, I look at him as a caretaker quarterback. It'll be up to him to elevate his game enough to bump up that status. Hopefully, he's not doing like you guys, and blaming it on everybody else.



Like I said before never blame it on A PLAYER. They don't call it a team sport for ****s and giggles.

Needa Pass Rush
01-24-2005, 11:13 PM
Hopefully, he's not doing like you guys, and blaming it on everybody else.

Come on, TJ. Most of what I have read in this thread says that it is more on the TEAM. You seem to be the guy focused on ONE GUY. More then one of those dropped balls came on a drive-killing, third down play.

Jake has as much work to do this off season as all the other parts of the offense do, IMO, but not MORE.

Cito Pelon
01-24-2005, 11:42 PM
Come on, TJ. Most of what I have read in this thread says that it is more on the TEAM. You seem to be the guy focused on ONE GUY. More then one of those dropped balls came on a drive-killing, third down play.

Jake has as much work to do this off season as all the other parts of the offense do, IMO, but not MORE.

Jake better step up his game a lot. He looked like he had no idea what he was supposed to do in the pocket. He had guys open all over the place on their regular patterns, and here Jake is with a nice pocket, and he can't find 'em, he's looking directly at one guy, and you can see he's in brainlock.

He's setting his feet for this one guy to get open, and he isn't open, and the pocket is still good, and, and, aaaannnnnnndddddddd, Jake throws into double coverage, desperately tosses to an outlet over the middle, or manages to get outside the pocket, and find Lelie long. And that was pretty much the passing game this year.

Jake didn't look crisp game after game. There's times, though, there's times where you can see he has the arm, he has the legs, he has the competitive spirit, and you're just waiting for him and the coaching staff to put it all together. With weapons like Q, Plummer, Bell, Droughns, Anderson, Smith, Lelie, K. Johnson, Putzier, Watts, I ask myself when are they going to put it all together on O?

orange 4 life
01-24-2005, 11:57 PM
We lost McCaffrey years ago. How is this even an issue in the Jake era? Jake's got Rod and Lelie. That's more than Brian really ever had throughout his tenure here, since Ed was injured in 2001.




Not sure what this means.



Whatever. We didn't get manhandled on the interior. That's where we had our biggest problems, sure. But overall, we've had a very solid offensive line. Jake has little he can blame on these guys for.




The pass to Putzier was on Jake. It was a poorly thrown ball, and Putz had to reach to grab it. When your quarterback consistently leads his receivers too far, he will also consistently see those balls get tipped for interceptions. It's a problem I doubt we'll ever see go away, as it's one Jake has always had throughout his career. It didn't just develop this year. He's always had this tendancy.




It doesn't change the fact that Jake is throwing them like old men handing out hard candy in church. He's a guy that other teams can literally game plan that they'll get at least one pick a game from. They literally can count on it.




Whatever problems we have on the defensive side of the ball says nothing to why Jake leads his receivers too far, throws so many interceptions, and struggles to make things happen when he's forced to throw from the pocket.




Indeed.



There's also no excuse for going three and out after the defense intercepts the ball in a playoff game.





I think we can win some games with him. I don't think we're going to win many Championship round games with him. He's a liability in the clutch.




I believe that I am. I'm not denying that Jake had a past in Arizona. I'm not denying that he is the interception leader in the NFL right now. I'm not denying that he leads his receivers. I'm not denying that he struggles mightily in the pocket. And I'm not denying that I'm disappointed in what we've got to show for him after two years.

The reality is, Jake hasn't blossomed into what we all hoped he would. He's still making the mistakes that he made in Arizona. He's a liability to a ball control gameplan, which is the foundation of Shanahan's offense. You can't turn the ball over like <a href="http://www.nfl.com/players/playerpage/1599" target="_blank">Trent Green</a> at Deltha O'neal's birthday party all season long and expect that it'll all be ok.



The point was, we didn't win with Morton, so the analogy is good. But incidentally, it's nice to learn that it wasn't Morton's fault either.

youre beyond hope taco. sad but true.

1) okay fine, we lost mccaffrey years ago. i love how you conveniently ignored portis and sharpe. they dont matter either?
2) how do you "not know what this means"? seriously? it means that after losing those key players, media and you YOURSELF said we'd be lucky to finish middle of the pack on offense. we finished top 5. seems pretty simple.
3) youre damn right that was our "biggest problem" on offense. again, they led to an inordinate number of passes being swatted down at the line, and more importantly they CRIPPLED our redzone rushing attack at times.
4) i disagree about the pass to putzier, but even still, you of course ignore the one to carswell. too hard to admit the truth? wanna sell me on jake "owning" that one too? wanna tell me that he led carswell too much even though it was a friggin comeback route? wanna tell me jake shouldve stuck it in his facemask to make sure carswell didnt even have to use his hands? what a joke.
5) they cant count on a damn thing. we went three consecutive games without an interception, and we went three more with 2 or more. ever stop to think why? ever pay any attention to the situations in those games? again, you want to refresh my memory how many times we ran in the second half against atlanta?
6) actually, the defense has ALOT to do with the number of interception we throw. ever stop to wonder why teams who play alot of catchup alos throw alot of picks? ever think about the fact that being in obvious passing situations and facing nickel and dime defenses might just cause a few more interceptions? think about it now.
7) indeed back atcha. im amazed special teams isnt plummers fault too
8) there's no excuse for going three and out after a turnover? really? dude, you have some serious issues with your expections. all teams go three and out. matter of fact, wonderboy brady did it more than once in the first half of new england game against indy. difference was, his defense kept them in the game.
9) liability in the clutch? are you nuts? he plays his best in the clutch. he's shown that over and over again. like popps said, for the most part, his team let HIM down and not the other way around.
10) believe whatever you want. fact is, youre still wrong.
sure, plummer can play BETTER (everyone always can), but he has been VERY good since coming here. to examine the last two seasons and come away with the opinion that we cant win with jake just shows you dont have a grasp of how the game is played. further, your avatar reeks of raider fan and is pathetic and irritating.

11) maybe the root of the problem.
you blame any qb not named brian griese.
fact is, we WON the afc with morton.
fact is, it wasnt mortons fault he could barely stand (let alone run) in the superbowl. fact is, the SIX turnovers werent all mortons fault, and the johnson td that never shouldve been sure wasnt mortons fault.
fact is, we were good enough to win with morton, and we almost did.
fact is, plummer is a more talented qb than morton ever was...

....but his name's not brian griese, so it must be his fault right?

Bob's your Information Minister
01-25-2005, 12:43 AM
Orange 4 life,

You are very gung ho in your support of Plummer. Let me ask you this. What do you feel was the reason why the Broncos offense sputtered in the first half of the Colts playoff game?

Taco John
01-25-2005, 12:55 AM
2) how do you "not know what this means"? seriously? it means that after losing those key players, media and you YOURSELF said we'd be lucky to finish middle of the pack on offense. we finished top 5. seems pretty simple.

Actually, I predicted... *snicker* that we'd go to the Superbowl!

Damn fool I am. That was back when I wasn't as nervous as a virgin at a prison rodeo every time I watched Jake take a snap.

3) youre damn right that was our "biggest problem" on offense. again, they led to an inordinate number of passes being swatted down at the line, and more importantly they CRIPPLED our redzone rushing attack at times.

Whatever. Our line did a fine job for Jake. Jake's problem is that he hesitates when he is going to pass, and give defenders a split second to put their hands up. I can't believe anybody is trying to blame Jake's mechanics on the offensive linemen...


4) i disagree about the pass to putzier, but even still, you of course ignore the one to carswell. too hard to admit the truth? wanna sell me on jake "owning" that one too? wanna tell me that he led carswell too much even though it was a friggin comeback route? wanna tell me jake shouldve stuck it in his facemask to make sure carswell didnt even have to use his hands? what a joke.

If you ignore the fact that Jake routinely leads his receivers, why waste my breath on any of the interceptions? They're all everybody else's fault but the guy throwing them to you.


5) they cant count on a damn thing. we went three consecutive games without an interception, and we went three more with 2 or more. ever stop to think why? ever pay any attention to the situations in those games? again, you want to refresh my memory how many times we ran in the second half against atlanta?

Other teams can virtually game plan that they will get an interception against Jake. There are 16 games in a season. Jake has 20 interceptions. Do the math. Other coaches have.


6) actually, the defense has ALOT to do with the number of interception we throw. ever stop to wonder why teams who play alot of catchup alos throw alot of picks? ever think about the fact that being in obvious passing situations and facing nickel and dime defenses might just cause a few more interceptions? think about it now.

groooooooooooaaaaaaaaaan.

This is ridiculous. You jump up and down when I say that a better performance from Jake would help out our defense, but turn around and blame our defense for Jakes problems?


7) indeed back atcha. im amazed special teams isnt plummers fault too

I've never blamed Jake for a problem that didn't originate with him. I won't start now.



8) there's no excuse for going three and out after a turnover? really? dude, you have some serious issues with your expections. all teams go three and out. matter of fact, wonderboy brady did it more than once in the first half of new england game against indy. difference was, his defense kept them in the game.

That isn't the only difference between Jake and Brady. Nevertheless, Jake didn't lead OUR team to any first half touchdowns in a game he had to come up big in. What Tom did with HIS team is something else entirely. The two quarterbacks should never be mentioned in the same breath.

9) liability in the clutch? are you nuts? he plays his best in the clutch. he's shown that over and over again. like popps said, for the most part, his team let HIM down and not the other way around.

Yes. Jake is a liability in the clutch. But I welcom you to demonstrate for me all the games in which Jake came through in the clutch during the biggest games of the season.


10) believe whatever you want. fact is, youre still wrong.

We'll see. Right now, I'm right. Jake has 20 INTs and we lost in the first round of the playoffs for the second year in a row. Jake was supposed to be the difference. So far, he's not.


sure, plummer can play BETTER (everyone always can), but he has been VERY good since coming here.

I don't see it. I see a quarterback who's been average to below average.

to examine the last two seasons and come away with the opinion that we cant win with jake just shows you dont have a grasp of how the game is played.

Normally this is the part where I tell someone to go **** themselves, but I like you a great deal Jake. Don't ever presume to tell me that I don't have a grasp on how the game is played if you ever want a measure of respect from me. I'll do you the same favor and not insult your intelligence.

further, your avatar reeks of raider fan and is pathetic and irritating.

Good. That's what I thought of Plummer's performance during the second half of the season. It was pathetic and irritating.

11) maybe the root of the problem.
you blame any qb not named brian griese.

Uh? What? Don't even start in on Griese with me. You and I share a lot of similar views with regards to his tenure here.

Taco John
01-25-2005, 12:59 AM
Like I said before never blame it on A PLAYER. They don't call it a team sport for ****s and giggles.



I'm not putting all the blame on one player. I am putting the blame that I think Plummer is due on Plummer. I can't help the fact that his bonus came due after two years, and it's time to evaluate his progress...

wabbit
01-25-2005, 01:01 AM
I hold the opinion that Plummer will be an excellent QB for the Broncos for the next few years.

I also believe he is a guy you have tell exactly what you want him to do on a series-by-series basis, limiting his options to free-lance to running when the opportunity arises.

In discussions with some good analysts, it is increasingly clear to a lot of people...apparently Shanahan among them...that Plummer doesn't make the best decisions when given the option.

But, within a very defined play-call, he can perform especially well.

It's not what you want in the ideal. I mean, it's obvious Plummer will never be a Tom Brady or a Peyton Manning, but he could become Brett Favre-type guy, who can follow very explicit instructions and get you where you want to go.

He's extremely high strung...he rides the intensity of game situations, so in the flash of of an intense moment, he can think he can do things he simply cannot do.

Solution: Don't put him in those situations...and when they occur in the course of a game, just accept the fact that he won't make the right decision about half the time...and I'm being interpretive, not specific. I have no idea if he makes the wrong decisions exactly half the time.

Seems fairly simple to me actually

Popps
01-25-2005, 01:08 AM
Doesn't that speak a little about the accuracy of the balls being thrown?

No.

Seattle's receivers should give back their paychecks for the way they played this year. Matt H. put balls in guys hands all year long and they just flat dropped them.

As for ours, not nearly as bad.. but the infamous San Diego game featured a few real fk-ups on fairly easy balls by our guys.

So, no.

Popps
01-25-2005, 01:14 AM
Orange 4 life,

You are very gung ho in your support of Plummer. Let me ask you this. What do you feel was the reason why the Broncos offense sputtered in the first half of the Colts playoff game?

Good god, dude, are you serious?

Their offense ran wild on us. We had to abandon our ($hitty) game plan by the second quarter. Shanahan was calling 30 yard bombs on 3rd and short. Did you actually watch the game?

Look, Plummer has his issues as a QB. He's not free from blame. But seriously, if you think he had anything to do with that loss, you need your head checked. Our defense stunk it to epic proportions and our offensive game plan was atrocious.

Popps
01-25-2005, 01:16 AM
I just think it's funny, Taco. You spent a couple of years defending one of the least talented QBs this franchise has ever seen... a guy with absolutely no physical talent and even less heart.

Now, you're bashing a guy who just broke a couple of Elway's records and took us to the playoffs two years in a row. A guy who would clearly run through walls to win games and a guy who clearly runs the offense much better than the slob you spent two years defending.

It just makes no sense, whatsoever.

Bob's your Information Minister
01-25-2005, 01:25 AM
Good god, dude, are you serious?

Their offense ran wild on us. We had to abandon our ($hitty) game plan by the second quarter. Shanahan was calling 30 yard bombs on 3rd and short. Did you actually watch the game?

Look, Plummer has his issues as a QB. He's not free from blame. But seriously, if you think he had anything to do with that loss, you need your head checked. Our defense stunk it to epic proportions and our offensive game plan was atrocious.

Your offense was not up to snuff in the first half.

Apparently it wasn't the QB. So why are there not multiple threads on this board complaining about the rest of the offense?

Taco John
01-25-2005, 01:46 AM
I hold the opinion that Plummer will be an excellent QB for the Broncos for the next few years.

I hope you're right

I also believe he is a guy you have tell exactly what you want him to do on a series-by-series basis, limiting his options to free-lance to running when the opportunity arises.

In discussions with some good analysts, it is increasingly clear to a lot of people...apparently Shanahan among them...that Plummer doesn't make the best decisions when given the option.

This is consistent with my beliefs and the source of my frustration with the quarterback.


But, within a very defined play-call, he can perform especially well.


This I can agree with too. So basically we need to coach him up.


It's not what you want in the ideal. I mean, it's obvious Plummer will never be a <a href="http://www.nfl.com/players/playerpage/187741" target="_blank">Tom Brady</a> or a <a href="http://www.nfl.com/players/playerpage/12531" target="_blank">Peyton Manning</a>, but he could become Brett Favre-type guy, who can follow very explicit instructions and get you where you want to go.

Putting it like that certainly makes his potential sound more promising. I still can't help but being bothered by the fact that we're teetering on a line between Brett Favre and Kordell Stewart here, with Jake.


He's extremely high strung...he rides the intensity of game situations, so in the flash of of an intense moment, he can think he can do things he simply cannot do.

Solution: Don't put him in those situations...and when they occur in the course of a game, just accept the fact that he won't make the right decision about half the time...and I'm being interpretive, not specific. I have no idea if he makes the wrong decisions exactly half the time.

This is another part that I am struggling with on Jake. There's no coaching a guy can do to keep another guy from trying to throw an off handed pass with your back to the endzone. It's hard to accept that fact that he makes decisions like these when the usual results are interceptions.

I want to like Jake. Hell, I want to love him. But he makes me want to pull out my hair, especially in big games. I don't honestly thing I'm being too hard on the guy. I think he's getting criticism he's earned. It might sound like I've given up on him, but I haven't. I'm not calling for his head. I'm calling for his competitor.

I would like to hear what scouts and brass think about Jake's ability to consistently beat the blitz.



Seems fairly simple to me actually

I really hope Shanahan has it figured out too.

Taco John
01-25-2005, 01:50 AM
Good god, dude, are you serious?

Their offense ran wild on us. We had to abandon our ($hitty) game plan by the second quarter.

We didn't abandon our game plan the entire game. We stuck with it all the way through the fourth quarter. The game plan was to beat Manning with long, clock-killing drives. We pretty much stuck with it the entire game... almost to the point of ridiculousness in the fourth quarter.


I thought it was a good game plan that didn't get executed. I don't blame Shanahan or Kubiak for that game plan whatsoever. I think it was the right idea.

fontaine
01-25-2005, 02:02 AM
Despite the qb "<i>clearly</i>" not being the issue? Are you kidding me?

You don't throw a league leading 20 interceptions in a season and get away scott free with "clearly" not being the issue. And if throwing 20 INTs isn't a problem, then what is?

Jake OWNS each and every interception he throws. Nobody else owns them. Jake owns them.

. . .

I think he's as steady a caretaker as money can buy. A fallback to the Craig Morton days. He'll go out of Denver with a favorable memory. But unless something drastic happens up in his head, it won't be as a champion. That's just my feeling based on the two years that we've seen. Maybe the third year's a charm. I wish that his contract was structured so that we'd find out if it is before we had to commit many more years to a guy who still hasn't proven that he's left his Arizona problems behind.

You're either ignoring the dynamics of the offense or you're simply unaware of the situation around Jake this season.

The fact is if you want to rate Jake's performance then you have to take it into context of his work in 2003. In his first year the burden of the offense rested on RB/TE. Those guys were asked to score the TDs for us. And Jake was asked to take care of the ball, and throw it to Rod/Shannon on third downs or take off himself. Nothing fancy.

This year, because the burden of scoring those TDs was on Jake, he was put into a lot more situations where he had to win games for us. Griffin, Droughns weren't going to cut it because they couldn't get it done in the red zone when the safeties and CBs were much closer to the line of scrimmage in a tighter field. So third downs/red zone opportunities had to be converted by Plummer.

He threw 27 TDs and yes, those 20 ints as well but keep it in context. He was asked to air it out, without the benefit of the receiving weapons. Even though we lost most of our offensive production from last year in Sharpe/Portis, the offense under Jake still managed to score as many points as last season which is nothing short of amazing. If you keep that in mind, then there is a lot of potential for improvement in this offense outside of the QB position. Putzier, Lelie will continue to improve. If we get a better ground game next season and Watts stops hurting this team with key drops then this offense will improve tremendously, and Jake will "appear" to be a better QB.

Oh, and another thing, Jake's int % is less than that of Trent Dilfer when he won the SuperBowl so don't tell us that Jake isn't a guy you can win with.

Bob's your Information Minister
01-25-2005, 02:12 AM
He was asked to air it out, without the benefit of the receiving weapons.


Oh, poo. Lelie and Rod Smith played better than last year. Yeah you lost Sharpe...but your tight end production didn't drop at all (apart from the red zone).

fontaine
01-25-2005, 02:20 AM
Oh, poo. Lelie and <a href="http://www.nfl.com/players/playerpage/1220" target="_blank">Rod Smith</a> played better than last year. Yeah you lost Sharpe...but your tight end production didn't drop at all (apart from the red zone).

That's like saying Green loses Gonzo and Holmes in one offseason. Would you expect Green to be as effective, especially on third downs/red zone?

Northman
01-25-2005, 02:27 AM
The only thing im going to point out is this. for the people who are defending jake's turnover problem. even if we improve the defense immensely, Jake will still have to cutdown on his turnovers because turning over the ball that many times puts a lot of pressure on the defense and sooner of later even great defenses break. one reason why N.E and their defense is so successful is that Brady doesnt turn the ball over and in order for this team to get to the Super Bowl again jake will have to improve in that area otherwise a good defense will be wasted.

FADERPROOF
01-25-2005, 03:01 AM
Here are our losses:

week 2 @ Jacksonville - Plummer drives us down the field, puts us in a position to win, Q fumbles the ball.

week 7 @ Cincinnati - Jake can be blamed for this, total defensive meltdown as well

week 8 vs. Atlanta - Michael Vick becomes the 1st QB ever to pass for over 250 yards and rush for over 100 yards, our defense totally sucked this game.

week 12 vs. Oakland - Again, Jake drives us down the field, puts us in a position to win, FG blocked.

week 13 @ San Diego - Blame Jake for this one, still a tad funny how horrible he played and yet we only lost by 3 to the AFC West champs.

week 15 @ Kansas City - It was over after the opening kick-off, we never win at Arrowhead in December and if you want to put this on Jake for KC tossing a 45 spot on us, you're insane.

There you go, thats how we lost the games this year. Looks like if a few things go our way then we're a 12-4 AFC West championship team. We have much more pressing needs and bigger problems on this team other than our QB, and I truly feel that if we do get those addressed that we are a championship team.

FADERPROOF
01-25-2005, 03:02 AM
We didn't abandon our game plan the entire game. We stuck with it all the way through the fourth quarter. The game plan was to beat Manning with long, clock-killing drives. We pretty much stuck with it the entire game... almost to the point of ridiculousness in the fourth quarter.


I thought it was a good game plan that didn't get executed. I don't blame Shanahan or Kubiak for that game plan whatsoever. I think it was the right idea.

I'm sure the Colts knowing that they already won the game and started playing their practice squad guys on us had to effect on how well our offense looked in the 2nd half of that game...

gunns
01-25-2005, 05:15 AM
I think this whole thread is about Jake's mistakes. Yes our DL is horrible and that's on the DL, the WR dropped balls that's on the WR. What I get tired of is everyone making spins and excuses for Jakes mistakes. They are his. Tipped balls belong to him, INT's belong to him. Yes our WR had a large amount of dropped balls but Jake had an abundance of throwing attempts this year, I think that does increase the dropped ball stats. Shanahan felt in many games he could or had to put the game in Jake's hands. That will never work. Jake can't take the game into his hands and win it for us. Look at the two QBs in the SB this year. They can take the game into their hands and win it. QB isn't the position it used to be but a QB still has to be the leader on offense and take control of a game if need be. Will we ever have that with Jake? Are we willing to "hope" he improves? He will be our QB next year, but what about the next? Huge questions.

Mile High Shack
01-25-2005, 06:38 AM
well apparently after reading this thread

Taco hasn't gotten over his hate for Plummer.......and don't tell me you "like him" or whatever you are saying now

fact is when Griese was sucking it up, I didn't hear you attacking him like you are bashing Jake, you were saying...OOOO it's not BRIAN'S fault (slobber) it's someone else's...I mean BRIAN did this and that and led the team to this and that.

but when Jake takes us to the playoffs 2 years in a row...something Brian never did (2000 if it wasn't for Gut Rot we wouldn't of made playoffs) you bash him

there are a lot of problems with this team, Jake is only ONE of them. If we fix our pass rush and dline problem and get our WRs to play consistant ball. If we can get our offensive guards to actually block consistantly enough so we can run on 3rd and short and pick up the 1st down.

Jake is a problem no doubt, but he is probably the smallest problem behind our defensive and lack of offensive guards.

apparently all we need is a new QB and our team is ready for the superbowl according to Taco

bronco militia
01-25-2005, 07:34 AM
wow ....I guess you people read what you want to read.

I feel the same way as TJ. I don't see Broncos getting over the hump with him as their QB. I have nothing against Jake like I did with SOB......my beef is with the coaching staff.

Mile High Shack
01-25-2005, 07:38 AM
wow ....I guess you people read what you want to read.

I feel the same way as TJ. I don't see Broncos getting over the hump with him as their QB. I have nothing against Jake like I did with SOB......my beef is with the coaching staff.

and I maintain if Mark Rypien can win a superbowl, so can Jake

Rascal
01-25-2005, 07:39 AM
I blame Jake for the bad decisions and poor throws. But I blame the WR's, line, RB's for not doing enough also. Not to mention the play calling.

Jake is not going to carry this team...get use to it. But IMO I think he can lead this team to a SB with a supporting cast...hell Dilfer did it.

I'm willing to give Jake on more year. Next year Foster and Lepsis will have more experience, Watts Putzier and Bell should be better. If he doesn't improve then...then I'm for the hanging.

bronco militia
01-25-2005, 07:43 AM
and I maintain if Mark Rypien can win a superbowl

sure, with Joe Gibbs as our coach.

Shanny built this team to win John Elway a superbowl. IMO, it's still the same team waiting for that kind of QB to take the wheel again.

Mile High Shack
01-25-2005, 07:44 AM
sure, with Joe Gibbs as our coach.

Shanny built this team to win John Elway a superbowl. IMO, it's still the same team waiting for that kind of QB to take the wheel again.

then how can you blame Jake for that

we better get use to never winning another championship with that kind of offense b/c guys like Elway come along every blue moon

bronco militia
01-25-2005, 07:47 AM
then how can you blame Jake for that

we better get use to never winning another championship with that kind of offense b/c guys like Elway come along every blue moon

all I'm saying is this teams needs a franchise QB.

Mile High Shack
01-25-2005, 07:49 AM
all I'm saying is this teams needs a franchise QB.

so........

how do we go about getting one of those

tank a season or 2 so we pick in top 5 2 years in a row?

bronco militia
01-25-2005, 07:59 AM
so........

how do we go about getting one of those

tank a season or 2 so we pick in top 5 2 years in a row?

sure, or make a trade. The problem is is that Shanny thinks that Plummer is the answer.

So what's the point?

isn't it the Raiders turn to finish in front of the Broncos?

Needa Pass Rush
01-25-2005, 08:04 AM
The only thing im going to point out is this. for the people who are defending jake's turnover problem. even if we improve the defense immensely, Jake will still have to cutdown on his turnovers because turning over the ball that many times puts a lot of pressure on the defense and sooner of later even great defenses break. one reason why N.E and their defense is so successful is that Brady doesnt turn the ball over and in order for this team to get to the Super Bowl again jake will have to improve in that area otherwise a good defense will be wasted.

I would like to see the breakdown that shows at what position/score of the game Jakes picks came. One thing that seems like is a given, if you have a stouter defense and games are kept closer, it is likely that the ball isn't in the air as often. If the score is close or we're ahead we are chewing up clock with the running game.

Go get that stud Guard, DT & FS.

mccready7
01-25-2005, 08:50 AM
It's amazing what a big pair of Orange colored glasses will do to some people. I mean, some of you guys would run to the kitchen, dig out a spoon and eat dog$hit off of the sidewalk if it was painted orange and blue...
It's simple:
If Jake was a stock broker and lost 20 accounts a year, he'd be fired, no matter how many accounts he aquired.
If Jake was a truck driver and lost 20 loads a year, he'd be fired....no matter how many he got there intact.
If Jake was a high school QB and threw 20 interceptions a year, he'd be
benched.
If Jake was QB of the Broncos and throws 20 interceptions, well, that's OK because, according to some of you homers he can throw as many bonehead INT's as he wants as long as he ties Elway's yards in a season record and gets us to a playoff game.
Enough of the ranting. Here's my point. I'm with TJ on this 100%. I hope to God that Liquid Plummer will turn out to be the golden boy that everyone wants him to be. God knows it's a hard job playing QB in this town. However, I am not so much of a homer that I am going to sit back and make excuses for a guy who really hasn't changed a bit since he played in Arizona. The only reason he appears to be better than his Arizona days is that he has a much better supporting cast around him now.
I want the guy to do well. It's better for all of us. He's no Brady. Guys like Brady come around once every 20 years or so.
I'm willing, although I admit I have no choice in the matter, to give Mr. Plummer one more kick at the cat next season. Do I think he will make smarter decisions in clutch AND non clutch situations? NO.(It's the NON clutch bonehead INT's that really pi$$ me off). All I can do is hope that the guy shows some sign of changing his ways and that opposing coaches will not be able to game plan their offense based on the 1 or 2 or 3 INTs that he will throw in a game.
Now before someone comes back at me for pinning all of our problems on Jake...hit the brakes. I'm not. We have major Defensive issues and major coaching issues as well. This thread is about Jakes history of mistakes and his apparent lack of ability to overcome them...

Jason in LA
01-25-2005, 08:51 AM
Not really.

Considering how many times other facets of the game failed and collasped, I think he did a pretty good job.

He lost the SD game. But the rushing game nor the D werent really up to it either Taco.



The D played very well that game. The Chargers got three of their four scores off of drives that started on the Broncos side of the field. Two of them off of ints, and one off of a long punt return. The Chargers had one long drive the entire game. Then Jake takes points off of the board with a bad lob pass in the endzone. If he puts that ball in the back of the endzone it's probably a TD, and it's not a pick.

Tredici
01-25-2005, 09:00 AM
It's amazing what a big pair of Orange colored glasses will do to some people. I mean, some of you guys would run to the kitchen, dig out a spoon and eat dog$hit off of the sidewalk if it was painted orange and blue...
It's simple:
If Jake was a stock broker and lost 20 accounts a year, he'd be fired, no matter how many accounts he aquired.
If Jake was a truck driver and lost 20 loads a year, he'd be fired....no matter how many he got there intact.
If Jake was a high school QB and threw 20 interceptions a year, he'd be
benched.
If Jake was QB of the Broncos and throws 20 interceptions, well, that's OK because, according to some of you homers he can throw as many bonehead INT's as he wants as long as he ties Elway's yards in a season record and gets us to a playoff game.
Enough of the ranting. Here's my point. I'm with TJ on this 100%. I.

The rant was fun and all but here's the point. Only 32 people in the world make their living as starting NFL QB's. If a stock broker or truck driver screw up there are thousands of capable people ready to replace them. If only that was true at the NFL QB level.

But it's not.

Which is why Jake is going to be given a bonus and signed long term regardless of the bonehead interceptions. The scary thing is he is still better than then next available alternative.

So like you I hope to hell he can improve or the coaching staff can find a way to maximize what he does do effectively so there is less pain for what he hasn't managed to learn - avoiding bad decisions and mental mistakes.

Jason in LA
01-25-2005, 09:18 AM
I spent too much time on this yesterday in the "2005 Broncos starting QB" thread, so I don't want to spend too much time on it now. I'll say that I agree with TJ on this, and Orange 4 Life is still saying the same garbage from yesterday. It's funny that when people don't agree with him, he thinks that they should get their head examined, or they need to come back to reality. But he doesn't realize that most of the stuff he's saying is like saying 2+2=5.

The O line played well all year, and Jake had all the weapons that he needed. Good running game, and good receivers.

Vick and Ben may have a similar int percentage, but you can't give them credit for picks they didn't throw. Neither of those guys threw 20 picks. They were smart enough to take a sack, or run with the ball, or throw the ball away. Why can't Plummer do that?

Jake never really had McCaffrey. McCaffrey barely played last year.

The O line was better than last year. Lepsis was better than Salaam at LT. And Foster played very good for a first year starter. Blaming the O line for Jake having tipped passes is silly. The O line can't hold the D linemen. On the tipped pass against the Chargers and Dolphins, both times the D lineman stepped away from the blocker, and jumped into the passing lane. The O lineman can't do anything about that. Plummer needs to throw the ball over these guys.

Jake isn't "the" problem, but he is "a" problem. He has earned the right to come back next year, but he hasn't earned $34 million. Restructure his deal or cut him.

orange 4 life
01-25-2005, 09:23 AM
Actually, I predicted... *snicker* that we'd go to the Superbowl!

Damn fool I am. That was back when I wasn't as nervous as a virgin at a prison rodeo every time I watched Jake take a snap.

Whatever. Our line did a fine job for Jake. Jake's problem is that he hesitates when he is going to pass, and give defenders a split second to put their hands up. I can't believe anybody is trying to blame Jake's mechanics on the offensive linemen...

If you ignore the fact that Jake routinely leads his receivers, why waste my breath on any of the interceptions? They're all everybody else's fault but the guy throwing them to you.

Other teams can virtually game plan that they will get an interception against Jake. There are 16 games in a season. Jake has 20 interceptions. Do the math. Other coaches have.

This is ridiculous. You jump up and down when I say that a better performance from Jake would help out our defense, but turn around and blame our defense for Jakes problems?

I've never blamed Jake for a problem that didn't originate with him. I won't start now.

That isn't the only difference between Jake and Brady. Nevertheless, Jake didn't lead OUR team to any first half touchdowns in a game he had to come up big in. What Tom did with HIS team is something else entirely. The two quarterbacks should never be mentioned in the same breath.

Yes. Jake is a liability in the clutch. But I welcom you to demonstrate for me all the games in which Jake came through in the clutch during the biggest games of the season.

We'll see. Right now, I'm right. Jake has 20 INTs and we lost in the first round of the playoffs for the second year in a row. Jake was supposed to be the difference. So far, he's not.

I don't see it. I see a quarterback who's been average to below average.

Normally this is the part where I tell someone to go **** themselves, but I like you a great deal Jake. Don't ever presume to tell me that I don't have a grasp on how the game is played if you ever want a measure of respect from me. I'll do you the same favor and not insult your intelligence.

Good. That's what I thought of Plummer's performance during the second half of the season. It was pathetic and irritating.

Uh? What? Don't even start in on Griese with me. You and I share a lot of similar views with regards to his tenure here.

okay, this time i wont hit every point, because its apparent we're not making any headway.
one thing i would like to point out is your statement about brady.
again, that statement shows me what in my mind is the root of your problem.
you say, "jake didnt lead us to any first half td's. what brady did is different entirely."

actually taco, what brady did ISNT any different. brady also didnt lead his team to a touchdown, and he had two three and outs and one four and out.
it was a 6-3 game at halftime.
again, brady's defense kept them in that game, and in the SECOND half the pats went on 7 and 8 minute drives.
honestly taco, whats to say we wouldnt have done the same thing had our defense kept us in the game?

brady threw for all of 144 yards in that game, and it was on 27 pass attempts (for an abysmal 5.3 yards per pass)

dont you see it?
im NOT bashing brady, and i AGREE that he is VERY good at managing a game, and very good at making the necessary plays, but he is ABLE to be in those situations because he plays on a team who's defense always keeps him the game!!

anyway, i have alot of respect for you, and i want to apologize for a couple comments in the earlier post.
i disagree with you entirely, i think the position youre taking is ludicrous, and i think its made worse by the fact that you defended griese till the end, but i never shouldve attacked you personally. i typed before i thought, which you know i have a tendency to do sometimes. my apologies.

YES, i shared most of your views about griese, but thats why it surprises me even MORE that you now bash a guy who's obviously a much better player AND leader.

still though, you have a right to your opinion.
im sick to death of hearing that opinion from people, but there's nothing i can do. its just a passionate issue for me, and i dont want to see another qb run out of denver by the ghost of a player 6 years retired.
i shouldnt have reacted as i did, and i DESERVED to be told to go **** myself, but its nice that you refrained.
i have NO respect for your position, but ALOT of respect for you.

all the best my brother. get your butt out to a game next season.

jake

orange 4 life
01-25-2005, 09:24 AM
almost forgot!

popps, denfan, wabbit, and fontaine.

great posts guys. right on the money.

orange 4 life
01-25-2005, 09:43 AM
jason,

get your head examined..im kidding....sort of. :poke: ;D

listen, we went round and round yesterday too, and its apparent that along with taco your minds already made up to ignore the dynamics of exactly what happened. fine. your choice. it stinks, but i cant change it.

still, you need to at least get facts straight.

two things.

1) calling that PLAY took points off the board, not the throw itself. if it was farther back in the endzone, rod wouldnt have been there at all. fact is, the pass hit both of rods hands. problem was, the safety was there to catch the pass after rod couldnt secure it (im NOT blaming rod incidentally)
plummer DOES deserve some heat for that play, since ultimately he chose it, but it was not an errant throw. just an errant playcall from shanny and jake.
still though, at the end of the day jake STILL had us primed to win the game, and watts drops another one. game over.

2) this "giving people credit for int's they didnt throw" stuff is just ridiculous. apparently you have a hard time with the concept of more passes, more picks. i DO see and recognize your point about taking off and running, but thats a TINY fraction of the time, especially in bens case. bottom line is that NEITHER vick or ben DROPPED BACK TO PASS nearly as often as plummer. bottom line is that the best indicator of a qb's propensity for throwing picks is the PERCENTAGE of the time he does it. if ben had thrown 500 passes, he wouldve had 20 int's.

still though, i DO agree that 20 is too many. for crying out loud, who wouldnt?
all im saying is that there was ALOT more than meets the eye, and ALOT more good than bad from plummer. correct the problems AROUND him and he's SHOWN already that he has what it takes.
replace him and we're in the toilet for the foreseeable future, and that SHOULD be unacceptable to any bronco fan who DOESNT need his head examined (kidding again!!)

jake

Rascal
01-25-2005, 09:52 AM
I would like to see the breakdown that shows at what position/score of the game Jakes picks came. One thing that seems like is a given, if you have a stouter defense and games are kept closer, it is likely that the ball isn't in the air as often. If the score is close or we're ahead we are chewing up clock with the running game.

Go get that stud Guard, DT & FS.

Here is that breakdown:

INT's:
Quarter 1: 5
Quarter 2: 6
Quarter 3: 6
Quarter 4: 3

Of the INT's in first quarter we were behind or tied in all of the games, never ahead at the time of the INT.

Of the INT's in the second quarter we were behind in 4, ahead in 2

Of the INT's in the third quarter we were ahead in 3, behind in 1, and tied in 2.

Of the INT's in the fourth quarter we were behind in 2, tied in 1

TD's
Quarter 1: 10
Quarter 2: 10
Quarter 3: 3
Quarter 4: 4

Of the TD's in the first quarter we were tied in 1, behind in 1, and ahead in the others

Of the TD's in the second quarter we were behind in 1, ahead in all the others.

Of the TD's in the third quarter we were ahead in all

Of the TD's in the fourth quarter we were ahead in 2, and behind in 2.

What this showed me is that we are not making the adjustments in the second half to continue scoring, whereas the other teams are. I know shocking, how many times have we harped on this. I put a lot of this (his lack of TD's in the second half) on the shoulders of the coaches for not making the adjustments to adjust to what the opposing team has done.

If you also look at his INT's, you will see that we were behind in the majority of them and often behind early. To me this provides further proof that Jake tries to do to much on his own. Does that come from bad habits of being in Arizona or his true demeanor I don't know.

Enjoy and please pass the rep.

Tredici
01-25-2005, 10:14 AM
Or it could mean if your intercepts go up in the third quarter your scoring opportunities go down.....

Or your attention span has reached it's limit.

Or your meds are wearing off...

Or because Romo isn't there having them eat time release carbo soup.

Jason in LA
01-25-2005, 10:14 AM
jason,

get your head examined..im kidding....sort of. :poke: ;D

listen, we went round and round yesterday too, and its apparent that along with taco your minds already made up to ignore the dynamics of exactly what happened. fine. your choice. it stinks, but i cant change it.

still, you need to at least get facts straight.

two things.

1) calling that PLAY took points off the board, not the throw itself. if it was farther back in the endzone, rod wouldnt have been there at all. fact is, the pass hit both of rods hands. problem was, the safety was there to catch the pass after rod couldnt secure it (im NOT blaming rod incidentally)
plummer DOES deserve some heat for that play, since ultimately he chose it, but it was not an errant throw. just an errant playcall from shanny and jake.
still though, at the end of the day jake STILL had us primed to win the game, and watts drops another one. game over.

2) this "giving people credit for int's they didnt throw" stuff is just ridiculous. apparently you have a hard time with the concept of more passes, more picks. i DO see and recognize your point about taking off and running, but thats a TINY fraction of the time, especially in bens case. bottom line is that NEITHER vick or ben DROPPED BACK TO PASS nearly as often as plummer. bottom line is that the best indicator of a qb's propensity for throwing picks is the PERCENTAGE of the time he does it. if ben had thrown 500 passes, he wouldve had 20 int's.

still though, i DO agree that 20 is too many. for crying out loud, who wouldnt?
all im saying is that there was ALOT more than meets the eye, and ALOT more good than bad from plummer. correct the problems AROUND him and he's SHOWN already that he has what it takes.
replace him and we're in the toilet for the foreseeable future, and that SHOULD be unacceptable to any bronco fan who DOESNT need his head examined (kidding again!!)

jake

It's not that I am chosing "to ignore the dynamics of exactly what happened", I just don't agree with you. I guess when people disagree with you they are chosing "to ignore the dynamics of exactly what happened".

Calling the play took points off the board? Man, you just keep making excuses for Plummer. On the lob pass in the Charger game, I'm pretty sure Rod still has enough life in his legs to run to the back of the endzone. Yes, the ball hit him right in the hands. But the problem was that the ball was under thrown (Rod had a step on his man), and Rod had to slow up for the ball. Giving the CB time enough to close the gap and get his hand on the ball. Rod didn't drop it, the CB knocked it out. If Plummer puts that ball in the back corner of the endzone the CB never has a chance, and the safety wouldn't have gotten his hand on the ball. It wasn't a bad play call. What good is having a high priced QB if you can't call passing plays for him?

When you say that Vick and Ben throw picks at the same rate as Plummer, you are giving them credit for picks they didn't throw. You are lumping them in with a guy that threw 20 ints. Last I checked, Vick and Ben didn't throw 20 picks. Again, just because I don't agree with something you said doesn't mean I don't understand what you said. I understand that the more passes a guy throws the more picks he will throw. But the fact is, Ben and Vick didn't throw 20 picks. They don't have as many pass attempts, but that doesn't mean they didn't drop back to pass a lot. If they take a sack, or run with the ball, it doesn't go down as a pass attempt, but it's still a passing play.

If you agree that 20 picks is too many, then what are we arguing about? Nobody has ever said Plummer is a bad QB. Just because we look at his shortcomings doesn't mean we are saying he's Ryan Leaf. I have yet to see any poster here say that the Broncos should just dump Plummer. We're just saying that he was part of the problem (not the entire problem), and he needs to do better.

orange 4 life
01-25-2005, 10:19 AM
rascal, what a great post, and some very useful information.

taco and jason,

does this really not make you guys think a little?

do you blame jake for the second half woes that we've had since before he arrived?

do you not ALSO see the NUMEROUS games where despite a poor second half gameplan, he still ultimately led us on game ending drives that wouldve won those games were it not for things out of his control?

do you not see those 4th quarter int's (by far the least) and rethink the "liability in the clutch" theory?

again guys, there's ALOT more than meets the eye. there's alot more under the surface of those 20 int's.

once again, let me say im in no way "homering it up" since i AM pointing out flaws in the team and areas of concern.
i DO recognize the need for limited turnovers, and i do place a fair share of that blame on plummer.
i just am looking at the WHOLE picture and attempting to show that at the end of the day, jake is MORE than enough. the issues at hand are whether or not we can put a capable enough cast and GAMEPLAN around him.

honestly guys, dont these stats make you stop and look past the surface?

Taco John
01-25-2005, 10:20 AM
i have NO respect for your position, but ALOT of respect for you.

all the best my brother. get your butt out to a game next season.

jake



Will do bro... We'll be breaking bread soon enough... :)

bendog
01-25-2005, 10:24 AM
Or it could mean if your intercepts go up in the third quarter your scoring opportunities go down.....

Or your attention span has reached it's limit.

Or your meds are wearing off...

Or because Romo isn't there having them eat time release carbo soup.
Or shanny's increasing the votage of the electrodes in your helmet in the second half.

Taco John
01-25-2005, 10:33 AM
do you blame jake for the second half woes that we've had since before he arrived?

I was sold on the idea that those woes would go away if we just threw money at Jake.



do you not see those 4th quarter int's (by far the least) and rethink the "liability in the clutch" theory?

Being a liability in the clutch speaks more about the schedule than the quarter we're in, and what it means to our season. Jake struggles in prime time games, and in big games where everything seems to be on the line. Can you name the biggest game in November or December against a playoff calibre team where we had that Jake came through for us, and that were it not for him, we'd have surely lost. I'm not remembering one.


i just am looking at the WHOLE picture and attempting to show that at the end of the day, jake is MORE than enough. the issues at hand are whether or not we can put a capable enough cast and GAMEPLAN around him.

I just don't agree. I thought we had a great gameplan in Indianapolis. I thought it was the *right* game plan. It was just poorly executed.

And as for me, I'm not looking at the surface. I'm not down on Jake simply because I looked at his stats sheet and noticed that he's thrown quite a few picks. I'm down on him because I'm looking past the number and evaluating what I'm seeing from him during games... And it's a quarterback who is having problems with his mechanics, and who makes terrible decisions half the time with the ball. I see a quarterback who hesitates in the pocket, and is rewarded with batted balls. I see a quarterback who stares down his receivers, and then follows it up with inaccurate passes and gets balls batted down or tipped before being caught (or dropped), often by the opposing team. Basically, I'm seeing the guy that plays on the Arizona game tapes that I have. Erratic. Inconsistent. Sometimes amazing. Sometimes amazingly bad.

Plus, it bothers me that everything that the Cardinals fans said about the guy seems to be true. He does make poor decisions. He does fumble the ball a lot, presumably due to smaller hands. He does need to work on his accuracy. All of that.

And still, I'm not calling for his head. I'm just calling for his competition.

Popps
01-25-2005, 10:52 AM
Your offense was not up to snuff in the first half.

Apparently it wasn't the QB. So why are there not multiple threads on this board complaining about the rest of the offense?

Simpletons always blame the QB first.

Second, most people on this board are smart enough to know that Jake Plummer isn't going to win a shoot-out with Payton Manning. You have to be able to play some defense.

Anything else I can explain for you?

Tredici
01-25-2005, 11:04 AM
I was sold on the idea that those woes would go away if we just threw money at Jake.




I'm down on him because I'm looking past the number and evaluating what I'm seeing from him during games... And it's a quarterback who is having problems with his mechanics, and who makes terrible decisions half the time with the ball. I see a quarterback who hesitates in the pocket, and is rewarded with batted balls. I see a quarterback who stares down his receivers, and then follows it up with inaccurate passes and gets balls batted down or tipped before being caught (or dropped), often by the opposing team. Basically, I'm seeing the guy that plays on the Arizona game tapes that I have. Erratic. Inconsistent. Sometimes amazing. Sometimes amazingly bad.



That pretty much sums up what I saw from Jake when I went to the Miami game. We won, but I don't ever remember seeing a poorer performance from a QB. I was stunned by how bad the guy looked. Whether it was a confidence level, bad tummy, or the moon in the wrong house, I don't know but there was no denying Jake was a disaster that day.

What keeps you in Jake's corner (for awhile yet) is his uncanny ability to move past the bad crap and do some good crap. Now if they could just discipline him into not needing the bad crap. Because it does seem the guy has a bit of a self destructive streak. He was running it full course during that Miami game until mid fourth quarter when Shanny reined him in and sent in every play. If any Coach has the stubborness to make Jake better in spite of himself it's Shanahan. So can't give up on the guy yet.

Rock Chalk
01-25-2005, 11:17 AM
Despite the qb "<i>clearly</i>" not being the issue? Are you kidding me?

You don't throw a league leading 20 interceptions in a season and get away scott free with "clearly" not being the issue. And if throwing 20 INTs isn't a problem, then what is?

No one said Jake didnt have problems, but hey lets just put words in people's mouths Isaac. You are good at that.

Jake OWNS each and every interception he throws. Nobody else owns them. Jake owns them.

This is the most absurd statement, even coming from you. NO QB is responsible for ALL their interceptions when receivers sometimes tip passes that should have been caught. :dunce:

I gave Brian Griese the benefit of a doubt because his blind side protection was a back-up center converted into a left tackle, and by mid-season his receiving corpse wat thinner than Pat Bowlen's hair, using 7th and 8th string guys. Jake has none of these excuses. He's got great protection. He's got great mobility. He's got a good receiving crew to work with, though he could use that elusive third wide-out... but it's gotten nowhere near as bad as what Griese had to work with some Novembers.

You sucked Brian Griese's dick for 3 years at least and you bag on Jake for one year. You STILL make excuses for that piece of sh*t but are ready to throw the towel in on Jake who clearly let Indy score 40 points in the first half of our playoff game.

But this isn't about what Griese had or didn't have. This isn't about, and shouldn't be about Griese at all. This is about Jake.

No, this is about you and you attempt to garner attention once again because of your pitiful football knowledge.

I don't believe we're going to win a Superbowl with him. I can't watch game after game of inconsistent ball and just homer it up that all these turnovers don't matter. They do! They cost us momentum. They cost us game plans. They cost us points. And they eventually cost us seasons.

Yet you believed we were going to win the superbowl come week 5 (or whatever) didn't you? You also believed we were going to win a SB with the Greasy One. Good call chap.

I get it if you like Jake. He's a hell of a likable guy. But don't tell me that he's "clearly" not the problem. That's just homer talk. He CLEARLY has problems. He's leading the league in interceptions. That is CLEARLY a problem.

What's clearly a problem is your lack of knowledge about football. Thats the only clear problem I can see.

I think he's as steady a caretaker as money can buy. A fallback to the Craig Morton days. He'll go out of Denver with a favorable memory. But unless something drastic happens up in his head, it won't be as a champion. That's just my feeling based on the two years that we've seen. Maybe the third year's a charm. I wish that his contract was structured so that we'd find out if it is before we had to commit many more years to a guy who still hasn't proven that he's left his Arizona problems behind.
Wish in one hand, sh*t in the other but whatever you do either get on board or go back to your home at Chiefs Planet.

Rascal
01-25-2005, 11:22 AM
I think somebody needs to make a new expression for Alec and TJ. How about two faces yelling at each other flipping the other one off and such. Should be called TJnAlec.

azbroncfan
01-25-2005, 11:26 AM
Haven't we had a thread about Jake's fault or not Jake's fault before?

bendog
01-25-2005, 11:40 AM
yeah, but is kneecapping or electroshocking him the most appropriate solution?

orange 4 life
01-25-2005, 12:08 PM
what really bothers me is the fact that we already ran one qb out of denver, and when the next one comes in and leads us to back to back playoff appearances, some are ready to do the same again.

i DO think jake is a "franchise qb", though i of course DONT think he's on par with either the greats of old or even a mcnabb, favre (of old), or a manning.
what i DO think is that true DOMINANT quarterbacks are a thing of the past.
yes, manning puts up AMAZING numbers, but as of yet has been unable to carry a team on his back when it matters. i would think differently if like elway his teams got blown away, but that just wasnt the case. new england was FAR from dominant offensively (only 6 first half points) and manning just couldnt get it done. he is the closest thing to dominant right now, and in my eyes he pales in comparison to an elway, young, or favre (again, favre of old)

in TODAYS nfl i think plummer is a "franchise qb", though by that i DONT mean that he can carry a team.
by that i mean that he IS a player that a team with good talent and coaching could rely on for 5+ years. to me, thats about all you can hope for anymore.

thats really NOT the point though.
lets say plummer is in no way a franchise qb. how many true FRANCHISE qb's are out there? mcnabb, manning, brady (not imo, but in most peoples. to me, he's exactly what ALOT of qb's could be with GREAT coaching and defense)
how many?
not alot is the answer, and whats more, WE CANT GET ONE OF THOSE GUYS!!

a true franchise qb (in the mold of the great ones) can make plays AND manage a game.
after those FEW players, you have the ones that will do one or the other.
we HAD a good game manager in griese, and everyone ran him out of town because "he wasnt a playmaker"
now, we have a playmaker, and people want to run him out of town because he isnt the greatest game manager.

what do you want?
me, i want the guy who leads, the guy who leaves it ALL on the field, the guy who doesnt hear the criticism and keeps on making plays, the guy who gets it done with his legs and arm, the guy who can throw downfield, the guy who can step on the field with 2 mins to play and EXUDE confidence.

look, if we were 6-10 the last two year, rebuilding might be in order, but that just isnt the case!
that said, its ludicrous to me to consider wasting a high round pick on a qb when we have PRESSING needs that we can address.
its ludicrous to consider bringing in a free agent when there arent any worth a crap out there, and even if THERE WERE, we'd still bury ourselves in salary, when right now we're in a position to compliment the qb and team we already have.

no matter HOW you spin it, 10-6 JUST ISNT THAT FAR AWAY!!
especially not when you consider the devastating injuries on the defense and the MANNER in which we lost the games we lost.
we match up terrible with the colts, and we were again in their house with a depleted defense.

sorry to go on so long like i always do, but at the end of the day, the question is:
do you want a playmaker or a game manager?
do you want to win NOW, or do you want to mortgage the next few years for the HOPE that we find that one in a million player?
ill take the playmaker, and ill choose NOW.

if you want to bring someone like a garcia in (cheap!!) to "push" jake, then fine, but its my philosophy that we already KNOW that jake is our best option right now, and knowing that we get behind him, make sure we dont mess with his confidence or the teams chemistry, and we focus on putting the players and gameplans around him that best take advantage of his skills

jake

bendog
01-25-2005, 12:19 PM
joking.

I figure Jake has another year in the system to show he can make plays consistently in the pocket. But, the guards and center have to give him room to step into his throws.

But, lets be honest, of the qb's in the postseason only Pennington with a bum rotator cuff was worse.

Rascal
01-25-2005, 12:25 PM
brees?

But we do need to upgrade our interior line.

Upgrade an interior lineman (both sides) and special teams and I think we do a lot better next year.

Throw in an upgrade at LB (which will happen if Wilson goes outside and Pierce goes to MLB), upgrade at CB (which MAY happen if Middlebrooks and Walls can stay healthy and return back to pre-injury form), upgrade at safety (Move lynch back and play fergy) and I think we are good to go...barring injury.

baja
01-25-2005, 12:25 PM
I think Jake suffered for the Sophmore let down I too want to see what he does next season. We should be grooming someone though.

bronco militia
01-25-2005, 12:25 PM
joking.

I figure Jake has another year in the system to show he can make plays consistently in the pocket. But, the guards and center have to give him room to step into his throws.

But, lets be honest, of the qb's in the postseason only Pennington with a bum rotator cuff was worse.


no way...he's only a rookie but Rothlesberger was horrible in this years playoffs.....and if you are looking at passing stats, Vick might have been the worst.

Jake was only part of the problem when they played the Colts. Now that we know the Broncos are going to keep Plummer, what are they going to do about the other problems?

DB-Freak
01-25-2005, 12:56 PM
Why is it that the OL gets credit for what Jake's feet did?

Where do you think this happy feet is coming from? The interior pressure has gotten to Plummer alot.

our O line is overrated and simply do not deserve the credit they get. Anyone who have seen all of the games should know and would have known that.

It was apparent since the preseason and really exposed since the Jax Game.

For people who want Plummer gone or dont like him, havent really backed up it at all . You give out general reasons with general theories which dont apply at game situations at all.

Franchise QBs dont grow on trees.

Tredici
01-25-2005, 01:00 PM
Why is it that the OL gets credit for what Jake's feet did?

Where do you think this happy feet is coming from? The interior pressure has gotten to Plummer alot.

our O line is overrated and simply do not deserve the credit they get. Anyone who have seen all of the games should know and would have known that.

It was apparent since the preseason and really exposed since the Jax Game.

For people who want Plummer gone or dont like him, havent really backed up it at all . You give out general reasons with general theories which dont apply at game situations at all.

Franchise QBs dont grow on trees.

Wait a minute...

I'm completely confused by the all the scientific proven facts contained in this post.

:dummy:

DB-Freak
01-25-2005, 01:06 PM
Wait a minute...

I'm completely confused by the all the scientific proven facts contained in this post.

:dummy:
haha

Come on 13 play along.

mosca
01-25-2005, 01:13 PM
With weapons like Q, Plummer, Bell, Droughns, Anderson, Smith, Lelie, K. Johnson, Putzier, Watts, I ask myself when are they going to put it all together on O?
you must have not been following our team very long... weapons? <a href="http://www.nfl.com/players/playerpage/302059" target="_blank">Kyle Johnson</a> is now a -weapon-? the guy's an unproven young fullback with a handful of catches, nowhere near a marquee player. i like the guy and think he'll play better, but let's not get too cocky here. anderson was hurt and didn't play all year, Q was good for one friggin' game before he went down. putzier was tolerable but is not near as good as sharpe or even chamberlain or clark of years past. watts had a very inconsistent rookie year and besides his one TD catch, i can't remember any game-breaking plays from the guy. i don't see how you can call any player besides lelie, smith, droughns, or bell a 'weapon' looking back at this season's play.

DBroncos4life
01-25-2005, 01:18 PM
you must have not been following our team very long... weapons? <a href="http://www.nfl.com/players/playerpage/302059" target="_blank"><a href="http://www.nfl.com/players/playerpage/302059" target="_blank"><a href="http://www.nfl.com/players/playerpage/302059" target="_blank">Kyle Johnson</a></a></a> is now a -weapon-? the guy's an unproven young fullback with a handful of catches, nowhere near a marquee player. i like the guy and think he'll play better, but let's not get too cocky here. anderson was hurt and didn't play all year, Q was good for one friggin' game before he went down. putzier was tolerable but is not near as good as sharpe or even chamberlain or clark of years past. watts had a very inconsistent rookie year and besides his one TD catch, i can't remember any game-breaking plays from the guy. i don't see how you can call any player besides lelie, smith, droughns, or bell a 'weapon' looking back at this season's play.


You called KJ young unproven fullback (which is true) but then go on to compare Putz to Sharpe who is the best TE of all time? Thats crazy talk.

bendog
01-25-2005, 01:19 PM
no way...he's only a rookie but Rothlesberger was horrible in this years playoffs.....and if you are looking at passing stats, Vick might have been the worst.

Jake was only part of the problem when they played the Colts. Now that we know the Broncos are going to keep Plummer, what are they going to do about the other problems?
ok, ben was worse. I was thinking AFC.

I'm waiting to see what he does next year. Assuming we get some pass rush back (such as it was) and get the interior of the oline worked out, no excuses. A playoff win at the minimum, and a trip to the conference final for a B-. For the whole organization.

bronco militia
01-25-2005, 01:24 PM
ok, ben was worse. I was thinking AFC.

I'm waiting to see what he does next year. Assuming we get some pass rush back (such as it was) and get the interior of the oline worked out, no excuses. A playoff win at the minimum, and a trip to the conference final for a B-. For the whole organization.

IMo, that would have been the goal for Broncos if they had kept CP and sharpe, but they didn't make the trip so my expectations were lowered to about 10-6 and maybe miss or make the playoffs.

Then the emergence of Droughns had the Broncos primed to win the division and definately host a playoff game. expectations were back up and Jake Plummer hit the wall and so did the Broncos....

in 2005 it's win the division and win a playoff game or just tank the whole f'n season and start over.

Jason in LA
01-25-2005, 01:31 PM
Why is it that the OL gets credit for what Jake's feet did?

Where do you think this happy feet is coming from? The interior pressure has gotten to Plummer alot.

our O line is overrated and simply do not deserve the credit they get. Anyone who have seen all of the games should know and would have known that.

It was apparent since the preseason and really exposed since the Jax Game.

For people who want Plummer gone or dont like him, havent really backed up it at all . You give out general reasons with general theories which dont apply at game situations at all.

Franchise QBs dont grow on trees.

This O line is built for run blocking, like it has been for the past 10 years. This O line is the same type of O line as it was in the Super Bowl years. It's never been a great pass blocking O line, even in the Super Bowl years. Elway still had some juice in his legs, and could scramble around. When teams pressured Elway too much, Shanny kept the RBs into block. Plummer was brought in because he can scramble. He can get himself away from the pressure. The O line is still a run blocking O line. Having a QB who can run allows the Broncos to keep a run blocking O line. I have no problem with the O line.

mosca
01-25-2005, 01:31 PM
It's simple:
If Jake was a stock broker and lost 20 accounts a year, he'd be fired, no matter how many accounts he aquired.
If Jake was a truck driver and lost 20 loads a year, he'd be fired....no matter how many he got there intact.
If Jake was a high school QB and threw 20 interceptions a year, he'd be
benched.
If Jake was QB of the Broncos and throws 20 interceptions, well, that's OK because, according to some of you homers he can throw as many bonehead INT's as he wants as long as he ties Elway's yards in a season record and gets us to a playoff game.
no, you only wish it was that simple. your analogies, while clever, don't apply to football. it is possible to win football games in which interceptions are thrown. as for the playoffs, hell, i want to win a super bowl, but unlike some fans here, i'm proud that my team actually made the playoffs while the hated chefs and ravens had to sit home. sure, it wasn't fun to watch us get spanked but at least i got to watch 'em play in the postseason.

Enough of the ranting. Here's my point. I'm with TJ on this 100%. I hope to God that Liquid Plummer will turn out to be the golden boy that everyone wants him to be.
i think that's where some people are all wrong. people want a 'franchise QB' or a golden boy? in this day and age that's not exactly required to win games or even a a super bowl... see dilfer, brad johnson etc. plummer can get the job done and -for the most part- this year he did. sure, he needs to improve in order to get us to a super bowl, but to a higher degree, so does our D-line, backup WRs, O-Line pass protection, and safeties. if you take a look at this board you see so many more posts bashing plummer than mentioning any of these other problems, and that's what irritates some of us. people refuse to take a look at the big picture.

FADERPROOF
01-25-2005, 01:33 PM
I think this whole thread is about Jake's mistakes. Yes our DL is horrible and that's on the DL, the WR dropped balls that's on the WR. What I get tired of is everyone making spins and excuses for Jakes mistakes. They are his. Tipped balls belong to him, INT's belong to him. Yes our WR had a large amount of dropped balls but Jake had an abundance of throwing attempts this year, I think that does increase the dropped ball stats. Shanahan felt in many games he could or had to put the game in Jake's hands. That will never work. Jake can't take the game into his hands and win it for us. Look at the two QBs in the SB this year. They can take the game into their hands and win it. QB isn't the position it used to be but a QB still has to be the leader on offense and take control of a game if need be. Will we ever have that with Jake? Are we willing to "hope" he improves? He will be our QB next year, but what about the next? Huge questions.

Do we need him to really improve? If Q hangs onto the ball and the FG against Oakland isn't blocked, you're looking at the 12-4 AFc West division champion Denver Broncos.

mosca
01-25-2005, 01:34 PM
You called KJ young unproven fullback (which is true) but then go on to compare Putz to Sharpe who is the best TE of all time? Thats crazy talk.
so it's crazy talk to compare putz to sharpe, the guy who he replaced?!? when do you -not- compare a new player to the one he replaces a year later? my point (which you seem to have missed) is that putz played nowhere near as well as sharpe, and that was one of the ways that the recieving game fell off this year.

bronco militia
01-25-2005, 01:35 PM
in this day and age that's not exactly required to win games or even a a super bowl... see dilfer, brad johnson etc.

I think that's the case for those particular players and their coaches....Shanny has proven that this will not work in his offense. See John Elway, steve Young

DB-Freak
01-25-2005, 01:36 PM
This O line is built for run blocking, like it has been for the past 10 years. This O line is the same type of O line as it was in the Super Bowl years. It's never been a great pass blocking O line, even in the Super Bowl years. Elway still had some juice in his legs, and could scramble around. When teams pressured Elway too much, Shanny kept the RBs into block. Plummer was brought in because he can scramble. He can get himself away from the pressure. The O line is still a run blocking O line. Having a QB who can run allows the Broncos to keep a run blocking O line. I have no problem with the O line.
Give me a break.

This OL is bottom feeders compared to the Super bowl O line in terms of pass protection. What a ridiculous idea to say just because he has mobility let him handle the pass rush by himself.

Our Run Blocking has been rather overrated and weak at times nowadays and its becoming apparent. So has the running game.

Its not a symptom of having plummer. Its the symptom of our team.

Jason in LA
01-25-2005, 01:37 PM
I think the problem here is that some of the Plummer supporters act like anybody that questions Plummer is a Plummer basher. That's not the case with me, and I'd say the same for TJ, judging from his posts. I'm not a Plummer basher. I have never said that the Broncos should dump him. I have never said that he shouldn't be the QB next year. So there is no need to go nuts when I, or anybody else, question him, and think he should do better. He needs to do better. There's no question about that. He has talent around him. His mistakes are on him. But the Plummer supporters will tell you the problem is the receivers, O line, coaches, and the defense. That's bull. Plummer needs to shape up. You Plummer supporters need to stop acting like Plummer shouldn't share in the blame. He's not "the" blame, but he's part of it.

FADERPROOF
01-25-2005, 01:41 PM
I think the problem here is that some of the Plummer supporters act like anybody that questions Plummer is a Plummer basher. That's not the case with me, and I'd say the same for TJ, judging from his posts. I'm not a Plummer basher. I have never said that the Broncos should dump him. I have never said that he shouldn't be the QB next year. So there is no need to go nuts when I, or anybody else, question him, and think he should do better. He needs to do better. There's no question about that. He has talent around him. His mistakes are on him. But the Plummer supporters will tell you the problem is the receivers, O line, coaches, and the defense. That's bull. Plummer needs to shape up. You Plummer supporters need to stop acting like Plummer shouldn't share in the blame. He's not "the" blame, but he's part of it.

Agian, with how horrible you and TJ and others makes him out to be at QB for us, if Q doesnt fumble and Elams FG isnt blocked, we're 12-4 division champs ready to host either NY or SD in the playoffs.

DB-Freak
01-25-2005, 01:43 PM
I think the problem here is that some of the Plummer supporters act like anybody that questions Plummer is a Plummer basher. That's not the case with me, and I'd say the same for TJ, judging from his posts. I'm not a Plummer basher. I have never said that the Broncos should dump him. I have never said that he shouldn't be the QB next year. So there is no need to go nuts when I, or anybody else, question him, and think he should do better. He needs to do better. There's no question about that. He has talent around him. His mistakes are on him. But the Plummer supporters will tell you the problem is the receivers, O line, coaches, and the defense. That's bull. Plummer needs to shape up. You Plummer supporters need to stop acting like Plummer shouldn't share in the blame. He's not "the" blame, but he's part of it.
See this is what im talking about

General statements with general theories involved where it clearly misleads and doesnt tell the whole story.

Wouldnt it be great if we could just apply general theories and statments like that?

mosca
01-25-2005, 01:43 PM
I think that's the case for those particular players and their coaches....Shanny has proven that this will not work in his offense. See John Elway, steve Young
i think you could say that about the shanahan offense of the 90s... these days his offense has evolved a bit, as most coaches' gameplanning does.

Jason in LA
01-25-2005, 01:45 PM
Give me a break.

This OL is bottom feeders compared to the Super bowl O line in terms of pass protection. What a ridiculous idea to say just because he has mobility let him handle the pass rush by himself.

Our Run Blocking has been rather overrated and weak at times nowadays and its becoming apparent. So has the running game.

Its not a symptom of having plummer. Its the symptom of our team.

Do you remember the end of the '97 season, when the Broncos took a nose dive? The Steelers and Niners took it to the Broncos. What was the big problem on offense? Pass protection. The Niners and Steelers had Elway running for his life. Those two losses cost the Broncos the AFC West. What did Shanny have to do? Keep the RBs into block, and use Carswell for pass blocking. Problem solved.

If the Broncos running game is overrated, then why are they always amoung the league leaders in rushing? They were 4th in the league this year. With nearly the same unit, they were 2nd last year, and 5th in '02. There goes your argument.

Who said Plummer needs to do it on his own? For the most part the O line has given him more then enough time to throw. When things break down, then it's on Plummer to get away. But the line didn't break down nearly as much as some people think. Plummer wasn't running for his life all the time.

Rascal
01-25-2005, 01:47 PM
I wont deny that Jake has his problems, but changing QB's (Which TJ isn't advocating but competition rather) is not the answer. I wouldn't be opposed to getting some competition either (heck Mauck may be it who knows), but at this current moment in time (yes we need to start grooming someone for the future but we currently have bigger problems) we need to worry about fixing the lines. Without good lines we will never go anywhere in the playoffs, and until that is fixed it won't matter if Elway came back out of retirement. Even Elway couldn't get a team to the playoffs if he didn't have time to throw or if the opposing QB had a century to find the open WR.

Our focus this offseason should be the lines plain and simple. Then after fixing those we can worry about some of the lesser problems such as OLB, CB, safety, FB, KR/PR, punter, etc.

If we don't fix the lines, then I'm taking that as a sign that we are rebuilding.

Orange4Life
01-25-2005, 01:47 PM
I've grown tired of the argument. My views on the matter have been stated many times without reposting them here. So let me just state one more time for the record that I support Jake and think he can get it done. I've been happy with his play alot more than I have been disappointed.

At the beggining of the year this was suppost to be the year of our dominating defense and the offense was just along for the ride. Well it turned out the D was not all that and we got suprisingly good production out of the O. Our O would have looked 100 times better if the D actully forced a couple turnovers once in a while.

Jason in LA
01-25-2005, 01:48 PM
See this is what im talking about

General statements with general theories involved where it clearly misleads and doesnt tell the whole story.

Wouldnt it be great if we could just apply general theories and statments like that?

I've given detailed posts for most of my arguments in this, and the other Plummer thread. I make one general statement and I get crap like this. Save that sh!t for somebody that always gives general statements.

Rascal
01-25-2005, 01:48 PM
If the Broncos running game is overrated, then why are they always amoung the league leaders in rushing? They were 4th in the league this year. With nearly the same unit, they were 2nd last year, and 5th in '02. There goes your argument.

Yes but when we needed the tough yards (red zone third and short) we were unable to produce because our run blocking isn't the same. Numbers can be deceiving, and you have been deceived.

DBroncos4life
01-25-2005, 01:50 PM
so it's crazy talk to compare putz to sharpe, the guy who he replaced?!? when do you -not- compare a new player to the one he replaces a year later? my point (which you seem to have missed) is that putz played nowhere near as well as sharpe, and that was one of the ways that the recieving game fell off this year.


NO the point is youre comparing a guy in his first year to a Probowl player, Hall of Fame player. Putz will get better and did a very good job last year considering the shoes he had to fill. How good was Sharpe in his first year starting? Not near as good as it was when he got more playing time under his belt. That is MY point. I don't like comparing HOF players with first year starters. It doesn't add up.

orange 4 life
01-25-2005, 01:52 PM
I think the problem here is that some of the Plummer supporters act like anybody that questions Plummer is a Plummer basher. That's not the case with me, and I'd say the same for TJ, judging from his posts. I'm not a Plummer basher. I have never said that the Broncos should dump him. I have never said that he shouldn't be the QB next year. So there is no need to go nuts when I, or anybody else, question him, and think he should do better. He needs to do better. There's no question about that. He has talent around him. His mistakes are on him. But the Plummer supporters will tell you the problem is the receivers, O line, coaches, and the defense. That's bull. Plummer needs to shape up. You Plummer supporters need to stop acting like Plummer shouldn't share in the blame. He's not "the" blame, but he's part of it.

oh bullsh!t.

have you seen tj's avatar?
what a joke.

where's the defense's picture photoshopped?
where's the picture pf pryce on the operating table?
where's the photo of the guards?
where's the photoshop of watts dropping GAME CHANGING passes against oakland, atlanta, and san diego?

actually jason, its quite the contrary.
you plummer bashers (taco more than you) act like an sign of support for him or any attempt to analyze WHY things happened the way they did is just an excuse, and that bothers you guys because you want your convenient easy scapegoat.

NO ONE has EVER said that plummer doesnt deserve ANY blame, HOWEVER, there are more than a few people who can see the reality of the situation, which is that plummer isnt even CLOSE to deserving the BULK of the blame.
sure, he can play better.
sure, the int's that WERE his fault can be cut down.
still though, its senseless and irrational to discount the many GOOD things he does by hyperfocusing on the int's, especially considering the manner and situations in which those interceptions happened.
its senseless and irrational to not grasp that putting plummer in more favorable circumstances is a better solution than replacing him.

good God man.
NO ONE said he was blame FREE.
just that he isnt anywhere near the TOP of the list of blame.

jake

Jason in LA
01-25-2005, 01:53 PM
Our O would have looked 100 times better if the D actully forced a couple turnovers once in a while.

Or if the O didn't turn the ball over so much. All of those yards don't mean much if the O turns the ball over.

DB-Freak
01-25-2005, 01:55 PM
Do you remember the end of the '97 season, when the Broncos took a nose dive? The Steelers and Niners took it to the Broncos. What was the big problem on offense? Pass protection. The Niners and Steelers had Elway running for his life. Those two losses cost the Broncos the AFC West. What did Shanny have to do? Keep the RBs into block, and use Carswell for pass blocking. Problem solved.

If the Broncos running game is overrated, then why are they always amoung the league leaders in rushing? They were 4th in the league this year. With nearly the same unit, they were 2nd last year, and 5th in '02. There goes your argument.

Who said Plummer needs to do it on his own? For the most part the O line has given him more then enough time to throw. When things break down, then it's on Plummer to get away. But the line didn't break down nearly as much as some people think. Plummer wasn't running for his life all the time.
Please.

you point out two games during 1997 where they had bad games. If you think OLs of SB year is same as this year you gotta wake up. Check out your strength of the O this year when we lost? Where was our Running game when we needed them? Where was our D when we needed them? We stack up yards but cant close the deal or convert at clutch situations. There goes your general stat of rushing yards.

You can keep your opinion on those teams by yourself. I dont get how that RB block and TE blocking is related to this? Did Shanny do that for Jake? No not really. i have seen Jake run for his life and avoid helluva a lot of sacks this year than I would have liked to.


Jake clearly has his faults and mistakes, but the team has really been a huge let down itself.

Jason in LA
01-25-2005, 01:56 PM
Our O would have looked 100 times better if the D actully forced a couple turnovers once in a while.

If the O didn't turn the ball over so much, they wouldn't have put the D in so many bad spots. How many times did the other team start on the Broncos side of the field after a turnover?

DB-Freak
01-25-2005, 01:58 PM
Yes but when we needed the tough yards (red zone third and short) we were unable to produce because our run blocking isn't the same. Numbers can be deceiving, and you have been deceived.
You got there before me.

Folks, I defend plummer and I am a former critic of his and to an extent still am.

But there are problems that really need to be solved before we chop off his head.

Mile High Shack
01-25-2005, 01:58 PM
looking at the threads lately regarding the Broncos......it seems Jake is turning into the Griese debate with the detractors and supporters

unless we get a guy like Elway, Bronco fans will never fully support the QB.

Jason in LA
01-25-2005, 01:59 PM
Please.

you point out two games during 1997 where they had bad games. If you think OLs of SB year is same as this year you gotta wake up. Check out your strength of the O this year when we lost? Where was our Running game when we needed them? Where was our D when we needed them? We stack up yards but cant close the deal or convert at clutch situations. There goes your general stat of rushing yards.

You can keep your opinion on those teams by yourself. I dont get how that RB block and TE blocking is related to this? Did Shanny do that for Jake? No not really. i have seen Jake run for his life and avoid helluva a lot of sacks this year than I would have liked to.


Jake clearly has his faults and mistakes, but the team has really been a huge let down itself.

Did I ever say this O line was as good as the '97-'98 O lines? Why don't you go back and read what I said. I said they were the same type of O lines. I didn't say this current O line was as good.

Yes, Shanny has kept RBs and TEs into block for Plummer at times. It's related because it shows that Shanny had to do it for the Super Bowl O lines because they were also a run blocking O line.

orange 4 life
01-25-2005, 01:59 PM
If the O didn't turn the ball over so much, they wouldn't have put the D in so many bad spots. How many times did the other team start on the Broncos side of the field after a turnover?

if the defense got an occasional turnover, the offense wouldve had decent field position occasionally.

see how this works?

it goes BOTH ways.
no one is saying that the offense didnt commit too many turnovers, because of course they did, but that has nothing to do with our defenses inability to get them back.

bronco militia
01-25-2005, 02:00 PM
looking at the threads lately regarding the Broncos......it seems Jake is turning into the Griese debate with the detractors and supporters

unless we get a guy like Elway, Bronco fans will never fully support the QB.

you're probably right....

FADERPROOF
01-25-2005, 02:00 PM
looking at the threads lately regarding the Broncos......it seems Jake is turning into the Griese debate with the detractors and supporters

unless we get a guy like Elway, Bronco fans will never fully support the QB.

If it comes down to that, put me in Jakes corner :)

DBroncos4life
01-25-2005, 02:01 PM
Or if the O didn't turn the ball over so much. All of those yards don't mean much if the O turns the ball over.


Yes the O could have helped the D out. Im a huge fan of upgrading somethings to make the redzone problems and the third down problems go away. If we did a better job last year it makes the D look better. At the same time though the D didn't always help the O out at all. Not getting us turnovers didn't help things out at all. SP teams let us down as well. We had the second worst avg starting postition in the NFL. Many of our drives started within our 20 yard line. Its much harder to get tds if you have to drive 80 to 90 yards then 60 to 70 IMO.

How all those problems get blamed only on Jake is nuts.

Jason in LA
01-25-2005, 02:02 PM
oh bullsh!t.

have you seen tj's avatar?
what a joke.

where's the defense's picture photoshopped?
where's the picture pf pryce on the operating table?
where's the photo of the guards?
where's the photoshop of watts dropping GAME CHANGING passes against oakland, atlanta, and san diego?

actually jason, its quite the contrary.
you plummer bashers (taco more than you) act like an sign of support for him or any attempt to analyze WHY things happened the way they did is just an excuse, and that bothers you guys because you want your convenient easy scapegoat.

NO ONE has EVER said that plummer doesnt deserve ANY blame, HOWEVER, there are more than a few people who can see the reality of the situation, which is that plummer isnt even CLOSE to deserving the BULK of the blame.
sure, he can play better.
sure, the int's that WERE his fault can be cut down.
still though, its senseless and irrational to discount the many GOOD things he does by hyperfocusing on the int's, especially considering the manner and situations in which those interceptions happened.
its senseless and irrational to not grasp that putting plummer in more favorable circumstances is a better solution than replacing him.

good God man.
NO ONE said he was blame FREE.
just that he isnt anywhere near the TOP of the list of blame.

jake

You can say you aren't making excuses for him, but you are. Blaming everybody else.

Like I said, I'm not a Plummer basher, because I have never said that he shouldn't be the starter next year.

You guys have been acting like Plummer is blame free.

DB-Freak
01-25-2005, 02:02 PM
Did I ever say this O line was as good as the '97-'98 O lines? Why don't you go back and read what I said. I said they were the same type of O lines. I didn't say this current O line was as good.

Yes, Shanny has kept RBs and TEs into block for Plummer at times. It's related because it shows that Shanny had to do it for the Super Bowl O lines because they were also a run blocking O line.
Exactly then Jason. But still that still didnt help the interior rush jason. Part of Plummers happy feet stems from that.

To be honest, Plummer has never played with a supporting cast that Elway and Young and Montana had in their SB winning years.

They needed those supporting casts to get there and actually win one.

This team has been disappointing in too many facets of the game to be considered a team one player way from SB and all that BS.

Mile High Shack
01-25-2005, 02:03 PM
If it comes down to that, put me in Jakes corner :)

if we don't get better next year I won't support him anymore

although it depends on the upgrades this offseason

Jason in LA
01-25-2005, 02:06 PM
Yes the O could have helped the D out. Im a huge fan of upgrading somethings to make the redzone problems and the third down problems go away. If we did a better job last year it makes the D look better. At the same time though the D didn't always help the O out at all. Not getting us turnovers didn't help things out at all. SP teams let us down as well. We had the second worst avg starting postition in the NFL. Many of our drives started within our 20 yard line. Its much harder to get tds if you have to drive 80 to 90 yards then 60 to 70 IMO.

How all those problems get blamed only on Jake is nuts.

I haven't seen anybody put all the blame on Plummer. The D line got no pressure. That's a huge problem, and it needs to be addressed. We are all in agreement that D line was a major problem.

But it's like some of these Plummer supporters get pissed when anybody mentions Plummer's share of the blame.

Mile High Shack
01-25-2005, 02:07 PM
I haven't seen anybody put all the blame on Plummer. The D line got no pressure. That's a huge problem, and it needs to be addressed. We are all in agreement that D line was a major problem.

But it's like some of these Plummer supporters get pissed when anybody mentions Plummer's share of the blame.

disagree

taco says the vast majority of our problems is plummer

DB-Freak
01-25-2005, 02:09 PM
disagree

taco says the vast majority of our problems is plummer
Its not only Taco MHS.

Remember the countless die Plummer threads?

orange 4 life
01-25-2005, 02:10 PM
looking at the threads lately regarding the Broncos......it seems Jake is turning into the Griese debate with the detractors and supporters

unless we get a guy like Elway, Bronco fans will never fully support the QB.

THATS why its such an important issue for me.
im sick and friggin tired of the spoiled fans that look no further than the qb for a place to heap blame.
they refuse to do any real analysis, and they do this because if they did that, their scapegoat wouldnt exist.

elway is ONE of a kind. elway is the best to EVER take the field.
elways dont come along once in A lifetime, the come along once in HISTORY.
there NEVER will be another.

for the love of God people, PLEASE dont let the fact that he played here cause you to turn against every qb to take the field after him.
PLEASE just start examining whats really happening.
PLEASE get behind your teams quarterback, and get behind your team.

the fact that a longtime bronco fan like taco would have that bullsh!t avatar that he does makes me sad, and it makes me sick to my stomach.
how far we've fallen from the fans we used to be.

enough people. enough.

NO ONE is asking you to be happy with a one and done playoff appearance, but i AM asking you to stop letting the ghost of elway cause you to not even stop and realize that alot of teams would be thrilled with 10-6 seasons.
i am asking you to stop letting elways memory cause you to turn against anyone who takes a snap for our team.
support the team.
support the team the way you used to, or in some people's cases talk to your parents and support the team the way your parents supported them.

jake

FADERPROOF
01-25-2005, 02:10 PM
if we don't get better next year I won't support him anymore

although it depends on the upgrades this offseason

I can agree with that, if we get a competent DL and still show no signs of improvement, then the blame is less used to go around.

DBroncos4life
01-25-2005, 02:11 PM
I haven't seen anybody put all the blame on Plummer. The D line got no pressure. That's a huge problem, and it needs to be addressed. We are all in agreement that D line was a major problem.

But it's like some of these Plummer supporters get pissed when anybody mentions Plummer's share of the blame.



Im a Plummer supporter, I was a BG supporter as well. If Ryan Leaf, or the Devil himself took a snap under the center I would cheer for them as well. If they make a mistake Im not happy if they do something good Im happy. Still it comes down to the TEAM. Players don't lose games teams do. So the fault shouldn't go to anyone but the TEAM.

Jason in LA
01-25-2005, 02:11 PM
no one is saying that the offense didnt commit too many turnovers, because of course they did, but that has nothing to do with our defenses inability to get them back.



The defenses inability to force turnovers has nothing to do with the offense turning it over.

Tredici
01-25-2005, 02:13 PM
disagree

taco says the vast majority of our problems is plummer


I don't think TJ said that at all. I think he mentioned the problems he feels are specific to Plummer. If you ask him to do the same for other players, or units of players, I think he would be happy to oblige.

Just don't him started on the left side of the line...

Mile High Shack
01-25-2005, 02:13 PM
I can agree with that, if we get a competent DL and still show no signs of improvement, then the blame is less used to go around.

that's the thing

we get a pass rush and some safety help

THEN some better offensive guards (or they do better either way)

and we still struggle.......yeah Plummer will start getting more of the blame and I might have to get rid of my Plummer jersey next

Mile High Shack
01-25-2005, 02:15 PM
I don't think TJ said that at all. I think he mentioned the problems he feels are specific to Plummer. If you ask him to do the same for other players, or units of players, I think he would be happy to oblige.

Just don't him started on the left side of the line...

hmm, it's possible but I don't agree

it's not just TJ

but the vast majority on his side claim that MOST (not all) of our problems are plummer's fault

there wsa this thread http://www.orangemane.com/BB/showthread.php?t=21717

and then another thread after that about coaching changes in 05

orange 4 life
01-25-2005, 02:18 PM
I haven't seen anybody put all the blame on Plummer. The D line got no pressure. That's a huge problem, and it needs to be addressed. We are all in agreement that D line was a major problem.

But it's like some of these Plummer supporters get pissed when anybody mentions Plummer's share of the blame.

thats such ffhukking bullsh!t and you damn well KNOW it.

some of these "plummer supporters" get pissed when we see an avatar like tj's, or the 200th "plummer sucks" thread.

tell me genius, but what does a number 16 boulder blocking the road imply to you?
what a friggin joke.
THATS the sh!t that pisses me off.
jake has SOME blame, as does everyone on the team.
NO ONE HAS EVER said he didnt, but youre godamn right im saying he's not a friggin roadblock to success.

FADERPROOF
01-25-2005, 02:19 PM
that's the thing

we get a pass rush and some safety help

THEN some better offensive guards (or they do better either way)

and we still struggle.......yeah Plummer will start getting more of the blame and I might have to get rid of my Plummer jersey next

Totally agree, but for now, since our safety coverage was bad, DL was shot to all hell, and OG's didnt help the cause, we still went 10-6 and made the playoffs, makes me say that Plummer is doing a bit more than tossing INT's out there.

That's what I still don't get from some people, we KNEW we were getting a system QB that is going to do better than in Arizona as long as we gave him the right players around him. We got the running game and we have the WR's, now it's time to help the OL, and then build that D up a bit more starting with the DL. System QB's do not waltz into situations like this and become Super Bowl contenders unless the surroundings are built for a Super Bowl calibur team. Given the DL problems along with safety coverage and offensive line, this team was not buitl as a Super Bowl contender yet.

So let's go into the offeseason and build up a championship D, then we'll see what this system QB can do.

bronco militia
01-25-2005, 02:20 PM
hmm, it's possible but I don't agree

it's not just TJ

but the vast majority on his side claim that MOST (not all) of our problems are plummer's fault

who cares how much Plummer is to blame....if you don't hink he's part of the problem, then you're only kidding yourself.

Mile High Shack
01-25-2005, 02:20 PM
who cares how much Plummer is to blame....if you don't hink he's part of the problem, then you're only kidding yourself.

he shares the blame

but as I addressed earlier, we have more pressing needs than a new QB

orange 4 life
01-25-2005, 02:22 PM
when we lost the superbowl in 1977/78, you know what happened?

the crowd sang "we love you broncos" to the team.
then over 50 THOUSAND people showed up at the airport to welcome them...

...and not a ffhukking ONE of them drew a picture of a boulder with craig mortons number on it.
they had more BRAINS than that, and they had more CLASS than that.

..and dont tell me about the friggin bar being raised.
what, we win a couple and now we can act like a-holes?
what a bunch of sh!t.
if a player doesnt perform, feel free to voice the criticism, but when a player plays and purs his heart out like plummer has, shut the hell up and focus on the REAL issues.

Odysseus
01-25-2005, 02:24 PM
I just think it's funny, Taco. You spent a couple of years defending one of the least talented QBs this franchise has ever seen... a guy with absolutely no physical talent and even less heart.

Now, you're bashing a guy who just broke a couple of Elway's records and took us to the playoffs two years in a row. A guy who would clearly run through walls to win games and a guy who clearly runs the offense much better than the slob you spent two years defending.

It just makes no sense, whatsoever.

It's ashamed that all the broken hearted Griese supporters are taking it out on Jake so early. Jake is a meathead but given the right coaching he'll produce. He has the heart to do great things. There are a lot more talented Quarterbacks that will never do anything in this league and it's because they have no heart. Jake needs a lot of work but if he does it in the off season rather than during game day this team will be fine.

orange 4 life
01-25-2005, 02:25 PM
The defenses inability to force turnovers has nothing to do with the offense turning it over.

no sh!t kiddo, but people like you, taco, and others dont give a rats ass about anything except bashing your scapegoat.

EVERY time something comes up that isnt against plummer, you point to something that is.

read the damn post you QUOTED!!

i know the offense had too many turnovers, the difference is im able to look beyond that.

Eye Patch
01-25-2005, 02:25 PM
when a player plays and purs his heart out like plummer has, shut the hell up and focus on the REAL issues.

Last I heard they don't give rings for heart... only for results. That is the real issue.

Give me a guy with an attitude that wins over a guy with heart that always comes up short.

Jason in LA
01-25-2005, 02:28 PM
thats such ffhukking bullsh!t and you damn well KNOW it.

some of these "plummer supporters" get pissed when we see an avatar like tj's, or the 200th "plummer sucks" thread.

tell me genius, but what does a number 16 boulder blocking the road imply to you?
what a friggin joke.
THATS the sh!t that pisses me off.
jake has SOME blame, as does everyone on the team.
NO ONE HAS EVER said he didnt, but youre godamn right im saying he's not a friggin roadblock to success.

Key word, "all". Has any poster on this board said that the D line shouldn't get any of the blame?

What ever issues you have with TJ you need to take it up with him.

Eye Patch
01-25-2005, 02:28 PM
It's ashamed that all the broken hearted Griese supporters are taking it out on Jake so early. Jake is a meathead but given the right coaching he'll produce. He has the heart to do great things. There are a lot more talented Quarterbacks that will never do anything in this league and it's because they have no heart. Jake needs a lot of work but if he does it in the off season rather than during game day this team will be fine.


Another heart take... like anyone would really know what his heart is...

Oh that's right you read the papers and watch 3 hours of donk football.

Yup.. you are in the know...

FADERPROOF
01-25-2005, 02:32 PM
It's ashamed that all the broken hearted Griese supporters are taking it out on Jake so early. Jake is a meathead but given the right coaching he'll produce. He has the heart to do great things. There are a lot more talented Quarterbacks that will never do anything in this league and it's because they have no heart. Jake needs a lot of work but if he does it in the off season rather than during game day this team will be fine.

My personal view is that they don't want their asses hanging out for the 2nd straight time just incase Plummer does fail in this system. They seems afraid in a way to take a stand as a Plummer supporter, when they got caught big time after Griese flopped. So it's time to bash Plummer until results are shown, because if Plummer flops then thats egg all over the faces again.

Jason in LA
01-25-2005, 02:34 PM
no sh!t kiddo, but people like you, taco, and others dont give a rats ass about anything except bashing your scapegoat.

EVERY time something comes up that isnt against plummer, you point to something that is.

read the damn post you QUOTED!!

i know the offense had too many turnovers, the difference is im able to look beyond that.

This is a Plummer thread. That's why we are talking about Plummer. Start a thread about the D line, and I'll post my opinion about them there (the post won't make excuses for their bad play). Because this is a Plummer thread, I'm going to post about Plummer.

Mile High Shack
01-25-2005, 02:34 PM
Another heart take... like anyone would really know what his heart is...

Oh that's right you read the papers and watch 3 hours of donk football.

Yup.. you are in the know...

why is it that you remind me of the two old men in the muppets who kept heckling fozzie

Jason in LA
01-25-2005, 02:36 PM
who cares how much Plummer is to blame....if you don't hink he's part of the problem, then you're only kidding yourself.

100% agree.

DB-Freak
01-25-2005, 02:36 PM
Im lost for words.

Jason in LA
01-25-2005, 02:39 PM
When the Griese debates were going on, I was all for a new QB. I supported him up until the Rams game at Mile High in his final year. That game showed me that he wasn't the guy. I wanted to see he get the boot after that year.

My view on Plummer is different. I don't want the Broncos to give him the boot. He's the right type of QB for the system. I just don't think he's earned $34 million. I think they should restructure his contract, which would give them more options. If they pick up Plummer's options, there will be no other option for a few years.

Eye Patch
01-25-2005, 02:39 PM
why is it that you remind me of the two old men in the muppets who kept heckling fozzie

because I can...

Jason in LA
01-25-2005, 02:40 PM
Im lost for words.

We are all happy for that. ;D

Mile High Shack
01-25-2005, 02:40 PM
When the Griese debates were going on, I was all for a new QB. I supported him up until the Rams game at Mile High in his final year. That game showed me that he wasn't the guy. I wanted to see he get the boot after that year.

My view on Plummer is different. I don't want the Broncos to give him the boot. He's the right type of QB for the system. I just don't think he's earned $34 million. I think they should restructure his contract, which would give them more options. If they pick up Plummer's options, there will be no other option for a few years.

you realize, even if they convert Jake's bonus into a signing bonus, it will accelerate if we cut him.......

so either way we are stuck with him

Jason in LA
01-25-2005, 02:43 PM
you realize, even if they convert Jake's bonus into a signing bonus, it will accelerate if we cut him.......

so either way we are stuck with him

I'm pretty sure they can restructure his contract so it won't be a cap killer if they want to cut him after a year or two (if it comes down to that). But if they pick up his bonus, it will be a cap killer.

orange 4 life
01-25-2005, 02:52 PM
Totally agree, but for now, since our safety coverage was bad, DL was shot to all hell, and OG's didnt help the cause, we still went 10-6 and made the playoffs, makes me say that Plummer is doing a bit more than tossing INT's out there.

That's what I still don't get from some people, we KNEW we were getting a system QB that is going to do better than in Arizona as long as we gave him the right players around him. We got the running game and we have the WR's, now it's time to help the OL, and then build that D up a bit more starting with the DL. System QB's do not waltz into situations like this and become Super Bowl contenders unless the surroundings are built for a Super Bowl calibur team. Given the DL problems along with safety coverage and offensive line, this team was not buitl as a Super Bowl contender yet.

So let's go into the offeseason and build up a championship D, then we'll see what this system QB can do.

amazing. an intelligent response. theyre getting few and far between.

question for the haters.
is denfans post PRAISING plummer?

no, its not.
its a fair and balanced view of the situation.
it shows a grasp of not only what plummer can and cannot do, but also what the REST OF THE TEAM was not able to do.

it summarizes well what EVERY bronco fan SHOULD be thinking, and what we should all be spending our time discussing.
instead, we're spending more time on the qb, because as if the 200 "plummer sucks" threads werent enough, we now have tj with that sh!tty avatar.

another question:
if the defensive line is the primary concern (consensus opinion is that it is) where are the 200 "dline sucks" threads?
there arent any, because we have so many people hyperfocussed on the wrong issue.

like freak, im pretty much at a loss for words, and thats saying ALOT for me!!

its really sad whats happened to our fan base since '98.
the first superbowl win was one of the happiest days of my entire life, but the way things are now almost makes me wish it hadnt happened.
maybe then people would still support their team like they used to.
for the 100th time, that DOESNT mean you cant voice criticism (Lord knows i do!!), but it DOES mean you dont start "(insert player here) sucks" threads, and it DOES mean you dont photoshop our leaders number on a picture of a boulder blocking the road.

really people. enough is enough.
act like bronco fans.

jake

Rascal
01-25-2005, 02:53 PM
If it comes down to that, put me in Jakes corner :)

Same here for at least one more year

Pendejo
01-25-2005, 03:09 PM
Quarterbacks are going to make mistakes...that's pretty much a given. The problem with Plummer is he makes so many boneheaded plays it's baffling. Some of the picks he throws are re-gawd-damned-diculous. Still it's hard to root against him though.

His career in Denver this far is a mixed bag. His numbers haven't been bad, and he's won a lot of games, but all it's led up to at this point is two first round playoff blowouts.

This will be his third year in Denver...they say it takes three years to learn the system...we'll see...maybe a higher comfort level will reduce his costly red zone picks. There are plenty of areas of concern for the Donks right now. Starting quarterback is about the last position they need to worry about.

Needa Pass Rush
01-25-2005, 03:13 PM
Yes the O could have helped the D out. Im a huge fan of upgrading somethings to make the redzone problems and the third down problems go away. If we did a better job last year it makes the D look better. At the same time though the D didn't always help the O out at all. Not getting us turnovers didn't help things out at all. SP teams let us down as well. We had the second worst avg starting postition in the NFL. Many of our drives started within our 20 yard line. Its much harder to get tds if you have to drive 80 to 90 yards then 60 to 70 IMO.

How all those problems get blamed only on Jake is nuts.


Ideally, we need to find the same type of agile and mobile OLmen just with a few more bricks in their jocks to be able to win the fistfights at the goalline for those tough yards. In that regard, I think Foster could be the first in that mold.

When the going get's tough and the "BIG" packages come in on D our light OLmen get exposed.

Old Dude
01-25-2005, 03:14 PM
As they say, the QB gets a disproportionate share of the credit ... and the blame.

Jake had his share of nice plays, but he also had some screwups. So did everyone else.

He's not the weakest link on the team. That would be the defensive line. That's going to take a lot of cash and effort to address. That's where the changes will be.

At the same time, I'm not going to praise Jake for having a great season, because he didn't, and he'd be the first one to say so.

DBroncos4life
01-25-2005, 03:48 PM
Welcome to the new age of football. You must win now or youre gone. NY is calling for Penningtons head. Only a handful of Bolts fans wanted Brees back. Couch was out of the NFL in a blink of a eye. Boller is feeling the heat and needs to win fast or hes gone. Im sure there are others as well. Team chemistry doesn't happen overnight. I think its safe to believe that between last year and this year somewhere in the middle is the Jake we will need to advance past the first round. Not playing Indy in the first round would be a nice start though. Indy is very hard to beat at home, which becomes even harder when a undrafted rookie is going up against a probowl type WR. Plummer should get his fair share of blame for things but he shouldn't get the amount he gets at times.

Jason in LA
01-25-2005, 03:59 PM
amazing. an intelligent response. theyre getting few and far between.

question for the haters.
is denfans post PRAISING plummer?

no, its not.
its a fair and balanced view of the situation.
it shows a grasp of not only what plummer can and cannot do, but also what the REST OF THE TEAM was not able to do.

it summarizes well what EVERY bronco fan SHOULD be thinking, and what we should all be spending our time discussing.
instead, we're spending more time on the qb, because as if the 200 "plummer sucks" threads werent enough, we now have tj with that sh!tty avatar.

another question:
if the defensive line is the primary concern (consensus opinion is that it is) where are the 200 "dline sucks" threads?
there arent any, because we have so many people hyperfocussed on the wrong issue.

like freak, im pretty much at a loss for words, and thats saying ALOT for me!!

its really sad whats happened to our fan base since '98.
the first superbowl win was one of the happiest days of my entire life, but the way things are now almost makes me wish it hadnt happened.
maybe then people would still support their team like they used to.
for the 100th time, that DOESNT mean you cant voice criticism (Lord knows i do!!), but it DOES mean you dont start "(insert player here) sucks" threads, and it DOES mean you dont photoshop our leaders number on a picture of a boulder blocking the road.

really people. enough is enough.
act like bronco fans.

jake

I guess the only responses that you'll call intelligent are the ones you agree with. These are just opinions. They don't have to be in agreement with your position to be intelligent.

Why aren't there a bunch of threads about the D line? You can't figure that one out? It's because we all agree that it is a huge problem. There is no debate.

Bob's your Information Minister
01-25-2005, 04:02 PM
That's like saying Green loses Gonzo and Holmes in one offseason. Would you expect Green to be as effective, especially on third downs/red zone?

First of all, Shannon was not as good as Gonzalez in his last year.

Second of all, you lost Portis but replaced his production in the running game.

But, if you're saying the loss of those players hurt Plummer, then I guess we were right. Does he have any excuses for this next season? Please let us know.

Rock Chalk
01-25-2005, 04:05 PM
Another heart take... like anyone would really know what his heart is...

Oh that's right you read the papers and watch 3 hours of donk football.

Yup.. you are in the know...

So you would say based on media reports and watching Viking football that Randy Moss has no heart?

But then, you are in the know right?

Heart does not mean what he feels dipsh*t, its HOW he plays the game and you can see that on the field, in his mannerisms, in his demeanor.

Jake plays with heart.

Randy Moss does not.

You can see it in both of their performances.

So dont give me or anyone of this sh*t that "we dont know whats in Jake's heart" when we can see it on the field.

Crushaholic
01-25-2005, 04:23 PM
Saying that Plummer isn't capable of leading us to the SuperBowl is not correct. For an example of what Plummer can do, I go back to the game at Chokeland. Plummer threw an interception on the second play of the game. He recovered very quickly and we demolished the Faders on that day. It should also be noted that the DEFENSE stopped Chokeland in their tracks early and often. It's amazing what can be accomplished when the other side of the ball shows up...

If anything, Plummer is in a slump (if you can call 4,000 yards a slump.) Hopefully, he will work on correcting the INTs and be the QB we know he is capable of being.

It's already been stated, but some of the INTs were NOT HIS FAULT. Do you see him criticize his teammates the way Griese did? A leader will have struggles from time to time. However, I feel confident that he can work through those struggles next year.

Taco John
01-25-2005, 04:36 PM
disagree

taco says the vast majority of our problems is plummer



I didn't say he's the "vast majority" of our problems. I did say that right now I believe him to be a road block.

Taco John
01-25-2005, 04:36 PM
But it's like some of these Plummer supporters get pissed when anybody mentions Plummer's share of the blame.


NO kidding.. they even invent quotes...

Jason in LA
01-25-2005, 04:46 PM
TJ, you owe me some pictures of some naked Bronco cheerleaders for getting me into this mess. ;D

Taco John
01-25-2005, 04:46 PM
THATS why its such an important issue for me.
im sick and friggin tired of the spoiled fans that look no further than the qb for a place to heap blame.
they refuse to do any real analysis, and they do this because if they did that, their scapegoat wouldnt exist.

elway is ONE of a kind. elway is the best to EVER take the field.
elways dont come along once in A lifetime, the come along once in HISTORY.
there NEVER will be another.

for the love of God people, PLEASE dont let the fact that he played here cause you to turn against every qb to take the field after him.
PLEASE just start examining whats really happening.
PLEASE get behind your teams quarterback, and get behind your team.

the fact that a longtime bronco fan like taco would have that bullsh!t avatar that he does makes me sad, and it makes me sick to my stomach.
how far we've fallen from the fans we used to be.

enough people. enough.

NO ONE is asking you to be happy with a one and done playoff appearance, but i AM asking you to stop letting the ghost of elway cause you to not even stop and realize that alot of teams would be thrilled with 10-6 seasons.
i am asking you to stop letting elways memory cause you to turn against anyone who takes a snap for our team.
support the team.
support the team the way you used to, or in some people's cases talk to your parents and support the team the way your parents supported them.

jake



I don't think any of this rant applies. Plummer's performance on the field has nothing to do with Elway. It has to do with his performance on the field.

First, we all know Jake isn't John. It's not even an issue.

I don't know why John is being dragged into this. John didn't throw those 20 INTs. John didn't try passing an off-handed ball near the endzone. John didn't lead his receivers too far and create a bunch of tipped balls.

When I evaluate Jake's play from game to game, let me assure you that the furthest thing from my mind is John Elway.

As far as my avatar goes, it's just the way that I feel based on what Jake's shown us so far. My analysis is that he's a road block. If that makes me a bad Broncos fan, so be it. At least I'm being honest.

I'd love for nothing more than to see Jake prove me wrong. He'll get another shot at it. But in two seasons, he hasn't developed as advertised.

Seriously, If we would have known two years ago that Jake would lead the league in Interceptions this year, nobody would have wanted to sign him.

Taco John
01-25-2005, 04:53 PM
Saying that Plummer isn't capable of leading us to the SuperBowl is not correct. For an example of what Plummer can do, I go back to the game at Chokeland. Plummer threw an interception on the second play of the game. He recovered very quickly and we demolished the Faders on that day. It should also be noted that the DEFENSE stopped Chokeland in their tracks early and often. It's amazing what can be accomplished when the other side of the ball shows up...



It's not single games like that which will prove anything. It's stringing them together. Jake HAS to recover very quickly from interceptions because he throws so many of them. The fact that he recovered doesn't impress me when he's had so much practice at it. NOT throwing the interceptions in the first place is the benchmark behind Plummer's development, given that is the stat that dominates his career.

Jake was great last year, when his interceptions were cut down. How many more games would we have won this year if Jake had kept his interception ratio down to what they were last year?

And again, I'm not abandoning Jake entirely. I'm just calling for competition. Surely, nobody can disagree that we should at least prepare a back-up plan.

Taco John
01-25-2005, 04:56 PM
That's what I still don't get from some people, we KNEW we were getting a system QB that is going to do better than in Arizona as long as we gave him the right players around him.



Jake as a system QB?


When did THAT happen? I can see calling Brian a system QB. That's exactly what he was. But Jake? I never KNEW that we were getting a ssytem QB. I'm suprised to hear anyone calling Jake that now. A system QB, he is not.

DB-Freak
01-25-2005, 04:57 PM
I didn't say he's the "vast majority" of our problems. I did say that right now I believe him to be a road block.
What the hell do you think a picture of a road block would imply?

DBroncos4life
01-25-2005, 05:05 PM
What the hell do you think a picture of a road block would imply?



That the count is pushing rocks down a hill???

gunns
01-25-2005, 05:09 PM
I think it implies exactly what you think it implies.

Thank you Taco for saying it like some of us feel. We know that Jake will be our QB next year and every Bronco fan hopes he does well. I would love to eat of huge plate of crow for what I think of our future with Jake if that happened. But as Taco said if it doesn't happen we damn well better have a back up plan or we'll be starting over.

DBroncos4life
01-25-2005, 05:13 PM
I think it implies exactly what you think it implies.

Thank you Taco for saying it like some of us feel. We know that Jake will be our QB next year and every Bronco fan hopes he does well. I would love to eat of huge plate of crow for what I think of our future with Jake if that happened. But as Taco said if it doesn't happen we damn well better have a back up plan or we'll be starting over.


Tell we draft a qb named Elway we will be starting over and over and over and over again.

FADERPROOF
01-25-2005, 05:15 PM
Jake as a system QB?


When did THAT happen? I can see calling Brian a system QB. That's exactly what he was. But Jake? I never KNEW that we were getting a ssytem QB. I'm suprised to hear anyone calling Jake that now. A system QB, he is not.

Alec may be right of your assessment of QB's if you don't think Jake is a system QB.

Jake NEEDS the players around him in order to be successful, that should be obvious to everyone. And what is that a definition of? A system Quarterback.

If we werent getting a system QB in Jake, what did you think we were getting? A guy that will carry the entire team if our running game struggles? A guy who will still win shootouts when our defense falters? A playmaker at QB? What other than a system QB could you possibly categorize Jake as?

Meck77
01-25-2005, 05:18 PM
I'd like to blame us fans. We need to be louder. Surely we could have had a few dozen delay of games or offside penalties that we were responsible for. It use to happen alot. Hey it's only one small part of the game but I've read on here from many posters that we were just a play or two away from beating the Raiders or Jags.

Another win or two and we could have had a home game. We need our home field advantage back and the fans are responsible for that.

Sure we can lay the blame on the players but we fans can do more. Ask Elway how much he values the fans that supported him at Mile High.

To those that say one fan doesn't make a difference ask Jake or Rod about that. I saw Rod on Best Damn Sports show the other day and he said if Jake didn't flip the guy off Rod would have done it.

DBroncos4life
01-25-2005, 05:19 PM
I'd like to blame us fans. We need to be louder. Surely we could have had a few dozen delay of games or offside penalties that we were responsible for. It use to happen alot. Hey it's only one small part of the game but I've read on here from many posters that we were just a play or two away from beating the Raiders or Jags.

Sure we can lay the blame on the players but we fans can do more. Ask Elway how much he values the fans that supported him at Mile High.



Very good!!! I thought that as well but that would get in the way of blaming everything on Jake

Circle Orange
01-25-2005, 05:24 PM
Enough of this...somebody call John, tell him get his damn knee fixed and come OUT of retirement!

Northman
01-25-2005, 06:39 PM
I would like to see the breakdown that shows at what position/score of the game Jakes picks came. One thing that seems like is a given, if you have a stouter defense and games are kept closer, it is likely that the ball isn't in the air as often. If the score is close or we're ahead we are chewing up clock with the running game.

Go get that stud Guard, DT & FS.



I agree with this 100% but two prime examples of bad decision making are like in the second Charger game when he threw the pick ( albeit was tipped ) in the endzone and the first Chief game ( in which we were leading ) he forces a left handed pass right to the defender. i know you cant control the ints that WR's tip away but im talking more on the bad decision making that he has. and the problem seems to be always be the same mistake. these are just things that i think he should have corrected years ago. ???

Play2win
01-25-2005, 07:04 PM
Jake is our QB (for now). The Quarterback, just like the head coach, gets rewarded for success and blamed for failure. We have had some degree of failure this season, so jake should get some degree of blame for how he performed.

Some of it has to do with how he performed and some of it has to do with the results he got. Even if none of it was his fault, he would still generate a fair amount of blame. If the team does poorly, then you (somewhat) blame the quarterback, because it is his responsibility to make his team succeed and win football games. It comes with the territory. So, yes Jake definitely deserves atleast some blame.

BRONCCRUSHFAN
01-25-2005, 07:18 PM
He proved last year that if he's on the shortest leash Shanahan can possibly put on him, he can manage a game for us... Unfortunately, he was injured in all of the games against our toughest opponents in the middle stretch, so we weren't able to see what he could do against those teams.

But who cares what he showed a year ago? What have you done for me lately? Jake still has more to prove than he doesn't.





It matters just as much as what he proved a year ago doesn't it? Actually, what happened to Jake in Arizona does matter, because it's part of his history. You can look at the things he did then and compare them with the things he does now. Which are a lot of the same things...





Jake wasn't in a Conference Championship, though. And he certainly wasn't the quarterback that either Vick or Roethlisberger are. I'm not sure this point really means anything.




Right alongside every other quarterback who's numbers were up due to the rule changes. (http://www.nfl.com/news/story/7953768) The old records don't mean as much as they did. When Dan Marino's NFL record, and John Elway's franchise record are matched or broken in the same season, there's something more going on.




We lost McCaffrey years ago. How is this even an issue in the Jake era? Jake's got Rod and Lelie. That's more than Brian really ever had throughout his tenure here, since Ed was injured in 2001.




Not sure what this means.



Whatever. We didn't get manhandled on the interior. That's where we had our biggest problems, sure. But overall, we've had a very solid offensive line. Jake has little he can blame on these guys for.




The pass to Putzier was on Jake. It was a poorly thrown ball, and Putz had to reach to grab it. When your quarterback consistently leads his receivers too far, he will also consistently see those balls get tipped for interceptions. It's a problem I doubt we'll ever see go away, as it's one Jake has always had throughout his career. It didn't just develop this year. He's always had this tendancy.




It doesn't change the fact that Jake is throwing them like old men handing out hard candy in church. He's a guy that other teams can literally game plan that they'll get at least one pick a game from. They literally can count on it.




Whatever problems we have on the defensive side of the ball says nothing to why Jake leads his receivers too far, throws so many interceptions, and struggles to make things happen when he's forced to throw from the pocket.




Indeed.



There's also no excuse for going three and out after the defense intercepts the ball in a playoff game.





I think we can win some games with him. I don't think we're going to win many Championship round games with him. He's a liability in the clutch.




I believe that I am. I'm not denying that Jake had a past in Arizona. I'm not denying that he is the interception leader in the NFL right now. I'm not denying that he leads his receivers. I'm not denying that he struggles mightily in the pocket. And I'm not denying that I'm disappointed in what we've got to show for him after two years.

The reality is, Jake hasn't blossomed into what we all hoped he would. He's still making the mistakes that he made in Arizona. He's a liability to a ball control gameplan, which is the foundation of Shanahan's offense. You can't turn the ball over like <a href="http://www.nfl.com/players/playerpage/1599" target="_blank"><a href="http://www.nfl.com/players/playerpage/1599" target="_blank"><a href="http://www.nfl.com/players/playerpage/1599" target="_blank">Trent Green</a></a></a> at Deltha O'neal's birthday party all season long and expect that it'll all be ok.



The point was, we didn't win with Morton, so the analogy is good. But incidentally, it's nice to learn that it wasn't Morton's fault either.

TJ, I'm a tad bit confused, or I entered the Frickin Twilight Zone.
All season you were a big defender of Jake, and now you're turning on him like a Pit Bull. Do I think that Jake is our answer to returning to the promise land? Not alone. Championships in any team sport is based on Defense first, and then controlling the clock with the running game or in hockey the dump and chase (Thus the 3 SB losses with Elway, the Broncos had neither). I will say that offensively, Jake struggled this year. I also say that he shouldn't get the 6 mill either. However, I am not willing to give an entire draft for an untested rookie QB. I have watched the Broncos slowly try and get younger, while adding a seasoned veteran here and there the last couple of seasons. I think Shanny learned his lesson with Pittman, and McGlockton. They need to put a better pass rush against the opposition and quit asking the offense to start within its own 15, and it gives the QB alot more options. 20 picks are alot, and that is something that Jake needs to address. However, there really aren't many other options left, other than giving up an entire draft to move up and grab one of 4 QBs in a very weak QB class. Then watch the threads here on the mane fly, when the Broncos finish 4-12, and people screaming how Plummer was much better. It's like when I was in the military, no place is better than your last duty station and your next one. It's our human nature.

DBroncos4life
01-25-2005, 07:28 PM
I think alot of the preasure on qbs would be lessened if they didn't keep track of wins or losses for them. It seems to be unfair to me that they get all the credit and the blame for what the team does.

BRONCCRUSHFAN
01-25-2005, 07:37 PM
I think alot of the preasure on qbs would be lessened if they didn't keep track of wins or losses for them. It seems to be unfair to me that they get all the credit and the blame for what the team does.

It's that "they were the last one with the ball" mentality. The same goes with Pitchers and Goalies. It also goes with being one of the highest paid players, as well as the most visible.

gunns
01-25-2005, 07:46 PM
Very good!!! I thought that as well but that would get in the way of blaming everything on Jake

I, and I think most of the people talking about Jake, am not blaming Jake alone for our season. Everyone knows what the other problems are and together they are a bigger problem than Jake. But this thread is about Jake and I think that's why some people are voicing their problems with Jake....and defending him.

DBroncos4life
01-25-2005, 08:20 PM
I, and I think most of the people talking about Jake, am not blaming Jake alone for our season. Everyone knows what the other problems are and together they are a bigger problem than Jake. But this thread is about Jake and I think that's why some people are voicing their problems with Jake....and defending him.


Gunns so far everyone from Jake to the cheerleaders have been blamed for one loss or another. Some games Jake was part of the problem just like the other 52 people on the field. Then you have the coaches, the ground crew all the way up to mother nature for the bad weather. The team won as a team the team lost as a team and tell people understand that its a team game these threads will always be here. It doesn't matter if the qb is Montana, Elway, Young or Bradshaw someone will be upset with the way the qb plays. From everything I have learned from when I was a kid the team that plays like team wins like a team. Why is it the Pats are so good now? Because they understand its all about the team.

gunns
01-25-2005, 08:33 PM
Gunns so far everyone from Jake to the cheerleaders have been blamed for one loss or another. Some games Jake was part of the problem just like the other 52 people on the field. Then you have the coaches, the ground crew all the way up to mother nature for the bad weather. The team won as a team the team lost as a team and tell people understand that its a team game these threads will always be here. It doesn't matter if the qb is Montana, Elway, Young or Bradshaw someone will be upset with the way the qb plays. From everything I have learned from when I was a kid the team that plays like team wins like a team. Why is it the Pats are so good now? Because they understand its all about the team.

And I have to disagree. I think a lot of teams, including Denver in some games this year, do not play like a team and lose it for the team. I am not singling out Jake or anyone else here. Actually if I were to put the larger amount of the blame it would go to the coaching staff, from Shanahan on down. I'll get to the weather later.

I think we do have bigger problems than Jake but I also don't think Jake will be able to take us to the SB. Fortunately or unfortunately I will find out if that's true next year and I hope to hell I'm wrong.

BRONCCRUSHFAN
01-25-2005, 08:36 PM
Gunns so far everyone from Jake to the cheerleaders have been blamed for one loss or another. Some games Jake was part of the problem just like the other 52 people on the field. Then you have the coaches, the ground crew all the way up to mother nature for the bad weather. The team won as a team the team lost as a team and tell people understand that its a team game these threads will always be here. It doesn't matter if the qb is Montana, Elway, Young or Bradshaw someone will be upset with the way the qb plays. From everything I have learned from when I was a kid the team that plays like team wins like a team. Why is it the Pats are so good now? Because they understand its all about the team.

Amen!! I wanted to give you rep, but they said it was too soon. Sry. I get so tired of those on this board that forget that football is a team sport, and it takes all 52 guys to be on the same sheet of music to get to the big dance (pun was intended). With the salary cap and the draft the way they are structured now, you will no longer see these teams that are dominate for an entire decade as before. They are up for 4 or 5 years, and then it crashes hard. Talk to me in 5 years, when NE is a 10-6 team fighting for the last playoff spot, and Jacksonville or Houston is the dominate team (just throwing names). That is the nature of the league, and that is why it is exciting enough to have a gazillion dollar Television contract (Too bad the NHL players cant get it through their skulls, the puckheads). People are going to complain about the QB here in Denver for the next 20 years, because of Elway. They did it in Pittsburgh, Dallas, San Diego, GB and Minnesota, when their HOF or successful QBs left the game. All of those teams crumbled into oblivion for MANY years, and yet Shanny has kept us competitive (only 1 non winning season), and Jake has guided us to the playoffs for two years in a row. However, no QB will be good enough, until this generation of Bronco fans have moved on and Elway's accomplishments have lost their luster. Even those Homers who are praying for Alex Smith (keep praying), will be all over him like white on rice by his 3d season, if he hasn't taken the Broncos to the Super Bowl. JMO from a guy who remembers the Broncos in the late 60's and 70's when they weren't all that great of a team.

mosca
01-25-2005, 08:54 PM
NO the point is youre comparing a guy in his first year to a Probowl player, Hall of Fame player. Putz will get better and did a very good job last year considering the shoes he had to fill. How good was Sharpe in his first year starting? Not near as good as it was when he got more playing time under his belt. That is MY point. I don't like comparing HOF players with first year starters. It doesn't add up.
hey, sorry if you don't like the comparison, but this is the NFL, the real deal, and we are competing for a super bowl. putzier -will- be compared with sharpe because he is the guy replacing sharpe. if he can't put up similar numbers then we need to find someone (or a TE by committee system) that can. just because it's his first year starting (not his first year playing, he's been on the roster for a couple years) doesn't mean he gets any pity points. when we are addressing the weaknesses on this team rookies and first year starters don't get any breaks.

DBroncos4life
01-25-2005, 08:55 PM
And I have to disagree. I think a lot of teams, including Denver in some games this year, do not play like a team and lose it for the team. I am not singling out Jake or anyone else here. Actually if I were to put the larger amount of the blame it would go to the coaching staff, from Shanahan on down. I'll get to the weather later.

I think we do have bigger problems than Jake but I also don't think Jake will be able to take us to the SB. Fortunately or unfortunately I will find out if that's true next year and I hope to hell I'm wrong.


Sorry gunns Im still not one the same page as you again. Coaches coach and players play. Bill Belichick sucked with the Browns, why is that. Maybe he didn't have his master plan or the players didn't by into the system either way it takes everyone on the same page for teams to win. You could blame a kicker for pushing his kick right and thats what people remember but on the drive before a probowl db blew his coverage and the guy scored the game winning touchdown. Whose fault is it for the loss? Kicker gets waived so it must be his fault right? Must be cause he was the guy that got cut. Like I said teams win and teams lose.

DBroncos4life
01-25-2005, 09:01 PM
hey, sorry if you don't like the comparison, but this is the NFL, the real deal, and we are competing for a super bowl. putzier -will- be compared with sharpe because he is the guy replacing sharpe. if he can't put up similar numbers then we need to find someone (or a TE by committee system) that can. just because it's his first year starting (not his first year playing, he's been on the roster for a couple years) doesn't mean he gets any pity points. when we are addressing the weaknesses on this team rookies and first year starters don't get any breaks.


Oh my. Thats pretty weak. Putz played in one game before this season, the Packers game last year. His numbers are better then Sharpes in his first full year as a starter and you want to toss him aside? He made mistakes just like others I won't say he didn't but PEOPLE LIKE YOU ARE THE REASON WHY EXPECTAIONS ARE SET SO HIGH AFTER WE LOSE A HOF PLAYER. Im sure he surpassed every goal people set for him on this board but yours.

Circle Orange
01-25-2005, 09:04 PM
I somewhat agree with your assessment regarding the 'gold standard required' by quarterbacks here. But Jake knew the fire would be hot going in. If he's truly prepared to deal with it (not lip service) time will tell. I'm still inclined to believe we've traded a one dimensional quarterback (Griese) for another (Plummer). The tradeoff is brains vs. athleticism. And neither seems capable of rounding out their game enough to be a more complete player.

As far as other franchises go, it's somewhat true they've struggled. The Steelers have gotten a lot of mileage from that core nucleus that won 4 titles. But Bradshaw left the game with a busted arm and bad attitude, and did not endear himself to the fans. Montana went out with a concussion in the cold in Kansas City. Young went out with a soft dome after throwing picks against the Falcons, sending his team home for the final time in that 'era'. Aikman was only moderately respected despite his accomplishments and also left with a soft dome and bad back. The Packers don't seem overly broken up about the prospect of Favre retiring. He seems fairly shot from all the personal tragedies and declining skill. Plus he's thrown away the team's playoff chances two years in a row.

mosca
01-25-2005, 09:05 PM
Last I heard they don't give rings for heart... only for results. That is the real issue.

Give me a guy with an attitude that wins over a guy with heart that always comes up short.
typical fader reply. you all love the guys with 'tude, huh. hate to tell ya, but heart produces results from time to time, and attitude produces, well... let's just look at your team of the last couple years.

mosca
01-25-2005, 09:19 PM
Jake HAS to recover very quickly from interceptions because he throws so many of them. The fact that he recovered doesn't impress me when he's had so much practice at it.
taco, this has to be one of the most ridiculous quotes i've seen on here. a total reach. the test of a good quarterback is how he reacts to adversity. this is one of jake's qualities and after 3 years of watching greaseball throw INTs and then sulk about it, i'm glad to have a fighter in there at the QB position who, in the event that he throws an INT (or 20 of them ^_^) can come back and put us in position to win the game. see: 2nd oakland game

BRONCCRUSHFAN
01-25-2005, 09:29 PM
I somewhat agree with your assessment regarding the 'gold standard required' by quarterbacks here. But Jake knew the fire would be hot going in. If he's truly prepared to deal with it (not lip service) time will tell. I'm still inclined to believe we've traded a one dimensional quarterback (Griese) for another (Plummer). The tradeoff is brains vs. athleticism. And neither seems capable of rounding out their game enough to be a more complete player.

As far as other franchises go, it's somewhat true they've struggled. The Steelers have gotten a lot of mileage from that core nucleus that won 4 titles. But Bradshaw left the game with a busted arm and bad attitude, and did not endear himself to the fans. Montana went out with a concussion in the cold in Kansas City. Young went out with a soft dome after throwing picks against the Falcons, sending his team home for the final time in that 'era'. Aikman was only moderately respected despite his accomplishments and also left with a soft dome and bad back. The Packers don't seem overly broken up about the prospect of Favre retiring. He seems fairly shot from all the personal tragedies and declining skill. Plus he's thrown away the team's playoff chances two years in a row.

Somewhat true? Pittsburgh has had 1 SB appearance since the post Bradshaw era. Montana went to KC after he was already past his prime. SF had one SB after Montana, but pre salary cap era. Aikman and the Cowboys had alot of success, but once again pre salary cap era, when Jerry Jones pulled a Steinbrenner and was buying the Super Bowl. Favre is still not "The Man" in Green Bay, that title still belongs to Bart Starr and his many championships. Fact is QBs like these guys and others like Fouts, Elway, Dawson, Marino, Brady, and Tarkenton only come to franchises once every 20 to 25 years, and the rest of the time all you can hope for is a QB that helps you stay competitive. Because once you stop being competitive, you have a situation in Cinncinatti or Detroit or Chicago, or New Orleans, or Denver P.E. (Pre Elway) where it is hard to even become competitive, let alone stay competitive.

With that being said, I don't think Jake can do it alone. He may even be like Dilfer, or Johnson, or Theismann, or McMahon and get to the SuperBowl on the back of the Defense. He's got his issues he needs to address, and I hope the Broncos can find a way to not give him his 6 mill, in case he can't solve those issues. However, if we were in Chicago and had to endure year after year of sub .500 seasons, back to back 10-6 seasons with playoff appearances and Jake Plummer as the QB doesn't seem all that bad.

DBroncos4life
01-25-2005, 09:33 PM
Mosca just so you know Im not dogging you for your opinions. Putz came up big in the playoff game and did get better in the last few games as well. The thing that is over looked is the three TE's but up better numbers then Sharpe by himself but still I don't think anyone made up for Sharpes mouth or the other things Sharpe brought to the team. Jeb is still learning as well so I think its not fair to compare him to a legend. JMO.

Taco John
01-25-2005, 09:34 PM
That quote is somewhat facetious.

And I WAS on Jakes bandwagon all year. But it's evaluation time, and in my estimation, he was oversold and he under-delivered. The other Jake that was available already led his team to a Superbowl, and we, The Denver Broncos, are known as the one and done team. Jake defines us around the league, and right now that definition is bad football. Like it or not, that's what people think when they think of Denver. And that's not only on Jake, though he's the face of the team.

If the contract term was three years, this wouldn't even be a discussion. But it's not. It's a two year deal with the escalator now. We need to take some of that money and bring in some competition. Jake's a big boy. If he's the quarterback people think he is, he'll thrive. If he's not, at least we'll have a back-up plan.

I'll hold out hope that the Idaho Boy will raise his game. But what I won't be doing is holding my breath.

BRONCCRUSHFAN
01-25-2005, 09:35 PM
taco, this has to be one of the most ridiculous quotes i've seen on here. a total reach. the test of a good quarterback is how he reacts to adversity. this is one of jake's qualities and after 3 years of watching greaseball throw INTs and then sulk about it, i'm glad to have a fighter in there at the QB position who, in the event that he throws an INT (or 20 of them ^_^) can come back and put us in position to win the game. see: 2nd oakland game

see: 2nd Oakland Game, Jacksonville Game, 2d San Diego Game, and Atlanta game, all of which he kept coming out and swinging and trying to get the Broncos a victory. But then again Mosca, see my post about being in the Twilight Zone and Taco.

mosca
01-25-2005, 09:35 PM
Oh my. Thats pretty weak. Putz played in one game before this season, the Packers game last year. His numbers are better then Sharpes in his first full year as a starter and you want to toss him aside? He made mistakes just like others I won't say he didn't but PEOPLE LIKE YOU ARE THE REASON WHY EXPECTAIONS ARE SET SO HIGH AFTER WE LOSE A HOF PLAYER. Im sure he surpassed every goal people set for him on this board but yours.
i never said that i wanted to toss him aside. don't know where you get that idea. i realize that he's a young player and i hope (and expect) that he will continue to grow and get better as years go by. i dunno where you get the one game stat, he played in 3 games in '02, 4 in '03 according to nfl.com's stats. hey, he may have been a special teamer and not a starter for all those games, but the fact is that he has been on our roster for 3 years now. look at shannon's stats and in his 3rd year on the roster he had 53 catches.

that being said, i think this year's TE play, recieving in particular, was not up the the standards of years past. the initial post that i replied to referred to him as a "weapon" and i don't know about you, but a starting TE who has 35 catches is not exactly a weapon. when someone calls a TE a weapon i think of gonzalez, sharpe, crumpler, heap, etc. not putz.

and i don't know about him surpassing every goal people had for him. we cut not one, not two, but THREE other former starter NFL TEs in training camp (chamberlain, weaver, and o.j. santiago). beating out that caliber of competition sort of had me hoping that this kid would have a breakout year. i'm not bashing on the guy, just letting it be known that he's not a weapon.

Taco John
01-25-2005, 09:38 PM
However, if we were in Chicago and had to endure year after year of sub .500 seasons, back to back 10-6 seasons with playoff appearances and <a href="http://www.nfl.com/players/playerpage/1003" target="_blank">Jake Plummer</a> as the QB doesn't seem all that bad.



That's if you're Chicago. Playoff appearances aren't the goal here.

Crushaholic
01-25-2005, 09:43 PM
I'm just calling for competition. Surely, nobody can disagree that we should at least prepare a back-up plan.

We have Kanell, and we drafted Mauck. I'm not going to say anything about BVP because people who have seen him think he will suck as a pro QB. Maybe your ire should be directed towards Shanahan, who thinks Plummer is good enough to be the starter and not Kanell or Mauck. We have options, but the coaching staff doesn't want to exercise them.

BRONCCRUSHFAN
01-25-2005, 09:52 PM
That's if you're Chicago. Playoff appearances aren't the goal here.

I completely understand that Taco, I lived through the Broncos P.E.. However, the point I was making is that this team has more holes than Swiss Cheese, and by pulling a Colorado Rockies and continually changing the roster isn't going to make it any better. There are bigger problems with this team than Jake, and the context I brought Chicago in was that once a team drops out of competitiveness, it's hard to become competetive. Free Agents don't want to go where they will lose, so you do what Chicago and Cinn and NO, and Detroit do, pay more for FA than you have to, to convince them to come to Denver. Jake at least has helped the Broncos stay competitive, which will keep them a player in the FA market. I mean, if the Broncos could get Jason Campbell or Sonnie Cumbie in the 2d round, hey I'm all for that. However, I don't think that is going to happen, so I'd rather be competetive than being like my Brother in law to be in Chicago and wish I had a team that was competitive, like the Broncos. It's all about perspective man.

mosca
01-25-2005, 09:52 PM
And I WAS on Jakes bandwagon all year. But it's evaluation time, and in my estimation, he was oversold and he under-delivered.
this brings up a good point. when you say he was "oversold"... what exactly did you expect when we signed the guy? did anyone promise that he'd be an elway-clone (not literally, but you get what i mean)? were you expecting another savior QB to lead us singlehandedly to the promised land? did the letdown of the griese years lead some people into having unreasonably high expectations of his replacement?

Jake defines us around the league, and right now that definition is bad football. Like it or not, that's what people think when they think of Denver. And that's not only on Jake, though he's the face of the team.
you're right on that one, taco. more than a few friends of mine have told me that they consider denver to be a mediocre team. of course this is after seeing the indy game, and they conveniently forget that we made the playoffs unlike a lot of the other 'mediocre' teams. but hey, you know what? i don't give a rat's ass if people think this. honestly i think a lot of this is due to idiots like sean salisbury and his ilk constantly dogging on our team. same thing i saw during the '97 season. hey, salisbury and all the rest can go yell it off the mountain for all i care, all the better for me the next time we win big. i'll laugh in their face the same exact way that i did when we beat green bay for our first SB win!

We need to take some of that money and bring in some competition. Jake's a big boy. If he's the quarterback people think he is, he'll thrive. If he's not, at least we'll have a back-up plan.
well, i go back to what shanny says every year in training camp. that every position is up for competition. keep in mind we don't exactly have ton of money to spend. if we want to bring in a top-flight, proven NFL QB just for competition's sake it'll likely take up the majority of the money we have. like many others have said, this money is better spent on more pressing needs. instead of buying a free agent who may not even beat out jake, i'd rather continue developing mauck and either keep kannel if he looks worth a damn or draft a late round QB in this draft.

BRONCCRUSHFAN
01-25-2005, 09:57 PM
We have Kanell, and we drafted Mauck. I'm not going to say anything about BVP because people who have seen him think he will suck as a pro QB. Maybe your ire should be directed towards Shanahan, who thinks Plummer is good enough to be the starter and not Kanell or Mauck. We have options, but the coaching staff doesn't want to exercise them.


You have to be careful about that though. I remember 1985 very well. The people were calling for Kubiak to be the starter, and to trade Elway for some offensive linemen. Well, as a Bronco fan, I'm glad that the coaches didn't listen to the fans. Anytime you generate a QB controversy, it can damage the team worse than bringing out the best in a player.
As far as BVP, we'll see in NFLE. I think it was because of Lubick's offense that has labeled BVP as a QB not capable of playing in the NFL. Michigan's offense did the same to Brady ???

mosca
01-25-2005, 09:57 PM
That's if you're Chicago. Playoff appearances aren't the goal here.
the thing that a lot of people don't seem to get is that in order to win a super bowl, we have to get to the playoffs first. from there, we might make it to the big dance. i like our chances there with an improved jake (and improved DL, cover safety, and recieving squad) much, much better than i do bringing in someone else. who this someone else may be, i dunno, but i don't see many great candidates for competition out there this offseason. and hell, i'll take playoff appearances and a shot at the super bowl with jake any season over 2-3 years of rebuilding with a rook and then who knows, maybe playoffs and maybe not.

Taco John
01-25-2005, 09:59 PM
We have Kanell, and we drafted Mauck. I'm not going to say anything about BVP because people who have seen him think he will suck as a pro QB. Maybe your ire should be directed towards Shanahan, who thinks Plummer is good enough to be the starter and not Kanell or Mauck. We have options, but the coaching staff doesn't want to exercise them.


Plummer is good enough to be a starter. Whether he's good enough to win a Superbowl, I don't know. He's going to need a lot of help, and a lot more hands on coaching. No more freelancing. Make your one or two reads and throw the ball away if it's not there, or run with it. Shanahan will have one hand tied behind his back again, but he's had to do it before.

He's had his day of blind bandwagoning by my part, but now it's time to produce. I'm not saying that Plummer needs to win it all, but if we don't win at least one playoff game this next year, I won't be the only one ready to throw him overboard... And if his contract isn't reworked, it's going to be another costly mistake.

We just threw wheelbarrows of cash down the Brian Griese drain, and people are wondering why I'm leery about paying Plummer? I can't imagine why.

Taco John
01-25-2005, 10:07 PM
Alec may be right of your assessment of QB's if you don't think Jake is a system QB.

Jake NEEDS the players around him in order to be successful, that should be obvious to everyone. And what is that a definition of? A system Quarterback.

If we werent getting a system QB in Jake, what did you think we were getting? A guy that will carry the entire team if our running game struggles? A guy who will still win shootouts when our defense falters? A playmaker at QB? What other than a system QB could you possibly categorize Jake as?



Brian Griese is a system quarterback. Brad Johnson is a system quarterback. Trent Dilfer is a system quarterback. <a href="http://www.nfl.com/players/playerpage/1003" target="_blank"><a href="http://www.nfl.com/players/playerpage/1003" target="_blank">Jake Plummer</a></a> isn't exactly a system quarterback. System quarterbacks are often called "cerebral." Trent Green is a system quarterback.

A guy like <a href="http://www.nfl.com/players/playerpage/235253" target="_blank"><a href="http://www.nfl.com/players/playerpage/235253" target="_blank"><a href="http://www.nfl.com/players/playerpage/235253" target="_blank">Michael Vick</a></a></a> isn't a system quarterback, he's a playmaker. If you try to constrain him with a system, you'll hurt your team more than help it. Jake is a lot closer to a <a href="http://www.nfl.com/players/playerpage/235253" target="_blank"><a href="http://www.nfl.com/players/playerpage/235253" target="_blank">Michael Vick</a></a> in terms of quarterback styles than he is with any of the three system guys I mentioned. These guys are system quarterbacks because you can plug them into pretty much any system, and they can operate it with relative efficiency. I don't think you can plug Jake into any system.

I think what you mean to say is that Jake is an average quarterback, and that's what you mean by "Jake's a system quarterback." It's true that Jake needs the players around him in order to be successful. That can be said for any quarterback. But as Jake goes, so goes the Broncos, no matter what players you put around him. You can have the best offensive line in the league in front of him, and he is still capable of struggling in the pocket. He's not comfortable there. So you have to devise gameplans that take him out of the pocket. Except you can't do that all season long.

All this talk about what Shanahan thinks about Jake is great... But Shanahan will be the first person to tell you that Jake needs to improve his game in the pocket. It's been Shanahan's mantra all year long with regards to Jake. Sooner or later, he's going to have to make it happen in the pocket.

BRONCCRUSHFAN
01-25-2005, 10:12 PM
Plummer is good enough to be a starter. Whether he's good enough to win a Superbowl, I don't know. He's going to need a lot of help, and a lot more hands on coaching. No more freelancing. Make your one or two reads and throw the ball away if it's not there, or run with it. Shanahan will have one hand tied behind his back again, but he's had to do it before.

He's had his day of blind bandwagoning by my part, but now it's time to produce. I'm not saying that Plummer needs to win it all, but if we don't win at least one playoff game this next year, I won't be the only one ready to throw him overboard... And if his contract isn't reworked, it's going to be another costly mistake.

We just threw wheelbarrows of cash down the Brian Griese drain, and people are wondering why I'm leery about paying Plummer? I can't imagine why.

Very good point.
We just threw wheelbarrows of cash down the Brian Griese drain, and people are wondering why I'm leery about paying Plummer? I can't imagine why.

I also agree with:
And if his contract isn't reworked, it's going to be another costly mistake.

However, there's really not many other options for the Broncos right now. Jake really has the Broncos between a rock and a hard place. They either trade their draft to move up in the first round and secure Campbell or Smith and have numerous bad seasons while they "rebuild" (God I've heard that out of my Brother in Law to be for the last 3 years with the Bears). Or they stick it out with Jake, hope to help him eliminate some of his Potato head mistakes, and get some FAs for him to ride to the SB. I'm one that remembers the bad times and so I'm one that hopes that, with all of the changes at offense that happened before this season out of the way, Jake and the offense can get it together like they did his first year here. I would like the Broncos to not HAVE to pay the 6 mill to find out. Who knows? Maybe BVP will have a killer NFLE campaign, and it gives the Broncos that second option (my big knock on Mauck is that he is shorter than Jake, and BVP is 2" taller). Although, in both Mauck and BVP, the Broncos have a Griese and Plummer on the same squad, Mauck being the cerebral, and BVP being the athlete.

Taco John
01-25-2005, 10:13 PM
this brings up a good point. when you say he was "oversold"... what exactly did you expect when we signed the guy? did anyone promise that he'd be an elway-clone (not literally, but you get what i mean)? were you expecting another savior QB to lead us singlehandedly to the promised land? did the letdown of the griese years lead some people into having unreasonably high expectations of his replacement?

I expected a playoff win... and to see some serious improvement from Jake. I expected to see his interceptions days would be left behind him. I expected we'd win an AFC West title in his second year.

I wasn't the only one. I just didn't adjust my expectations after we fell short.


you're right on that one, taco. more than a few friends of mine have told me that they consider denver to be a mediocre team. of course this is after seeing the indy game, and they conveniently forget that we made the playoffs unlike a lot of the other 'mediocre' teams. but hey, you know what? i don't give a rat's ass if people think this. honestly i think a lot of this is due to idiots like sean salisbury and his ilk constantly dogging on our team. same thing i saw during the '97 season. hey, salisbury and all the rest can go yell it off the mountain for all i care, all the better for me the next time we win big. i'll laugh in their face the same exact way that i did when we beat green bay for our first SB win!

Problem is, Salisbury was right all season. He might have gotten the individual games wrong from week to week, but in the end, he was dead-on accurate.

And what about Shannon Sharpe? Does the tight end who has caught more Jake Plummer touchdowns than any other Bronco have any credibility on this issue?


well, i go back to what shanny says every year in training camp. that every position is up for competition. keep in mind we don't exactly have ton of money to spend. if we want to bring in a top-flight, proven NFL QB just for competition's sake it'll likely take up the majority of the money we have. like many others have said, this money is better spent on more pressing needs. instead of buying a free agent who may not even beat out jake, i'd rather continue developing mauck and either keep kannel if he looks worth a damn or draft a late round QB in this draft.


I'm all for investing in competition. Next off-season may be too late.

DBroncos4life
01-25-2005, 10:15 PM
Brian Griese is a system quarterback. Brad Johnson is a system quarterback. Trent Dilfer is a system quarterback. <a href="http://www.nfl.com/players/playerpage/1003" target="_blank">Jake Plummer</a> isn't exactly a system quarterback.

A guy like <a href="http://www.nfl.com/players/playerpage/235253" target="_blank"><a href="http://www.nfl.com/players/playerpage/235253" target="_blank">Michael Vick</a></a> isn't a system quarterback, he's a playmaker. If you try to constrain him with a system, you'll hurt your team more than help it. Jake is a lot closer to a <a href="http://www.nfl.com/players/playerpage/235253" target="_blank">Michael Vick</a> in terms of quarterback styles than he is with any of the three system guys I mentioned. These guys are system quarterbacks because you can plug them into pretty much any system, and they can operate it with relative efficiency. I don't think you can plug Jake into any system.

I think what you mean to say is that Jake is an average quarterback, and that's what you mean by "Jake's a system quarterback." It's true that Jake needs the players around him in order to be successful. That can be said for any quarterback. But as Jake goes, so goes the Broncos, no matter what players you put around him. You can have the best offensive line in the league in front of him, and he is still capable of struggling in the pocket. He's not comfortable there. So you have to devise gameplans that take him out of the pocket. Except you can't do that all season long.

All this talk about what Shanahan thinks about Jake is great... But Shanahan will be the first person to tell you that Jake needs to improve his game in the pocket. It's been Shanahan's mantra all year long with regards to Jake. Sooner or later, he's going to have to make it happen in the pocket.



Vick isn't a qb hes a rb that lines up under center.

BRONCCRUSHFAN
01-25-2005, 10:16 PM
Vick isn't a qb hes a rb that lines up under center.

But both him and Jake are better QBs when they are moving around. Vick just had a better defense in a weaker Conference, that's all.

BRONCCRUSHFAN
01-25-2005, 10:23 PM
One last question and then I'm out for the night.

What is the worst thing that Jake can do to the Broncos? Put them in a position in a couple years to be drafting in the top 15 instead of the bottom 10? This question goes out to those who believe the Broncos need to suck for a few years and "rebuild."

DBroncos4life
01-25-2005, 10:23 PM
But both him and Jake are better QBs when they are moving around. Vick just had a better defense in a weaker Conference, that's all.


I don't know about that. Vick will never be a passer. Yes he may have a strong arm but it looks like he just floats the ball out to his recivers. Crumbler should have been killed by Dawkins. Sooner or later Vicks speed will go and he will get killed. As is the LBs now days are getting faster and faster. I just read about a future 4 or 5 star LB from Omaha that ran a 4.33 40! Im sure he will slow down when he gets bigger but still 4.3 from a LB is crazy. Vick needs his legs more then Plummer IMHO and that will get him killed.

DBroncos4life
01-25-2005, 10:27 PM
One last question and then I'm out for the night.

What is the worst thing that Jake can do to the Broncos? Put them in a position in a couple years to be drafting in the top 15 instead of the bottom 10? This question goes out to those who believe the Broncos need to suck for a few years and "rebuild."


I don't see us picking lower then 20 with Jake as our qb. (unless we trade)

Cito Pelon
01-26-2005, 01:54 AM
we cut not one, not two, but THREE other former starter NFL TEs in training camp (chamberlain, weaver, and o.j. santiago)..

Doled out 2-3 million in cap money to cut those guys. Brilliant personnel move.

Putzier is OK, but you have to have a QB that can get the ball to him somewhere within how far his arms can reach. I'm not a total Jake-hater, but they guy obviously has some work to do. ShanaKubiak were supposed to be so brilliant they could make a sow's ear into a silk purse, but of course that wasn't going to happen. They're not all that brilliant.

I'm not going to blame Jake when there's plenty of blame to go around. The guy can get it done, get you wins, but it's a team game, and it's team blame from the top down if you want do a post-mortem for the 2004 season.

Jake's a fierce competitor that took the first significant injuries of his career in 2003, and didn't use his legs much at all this year - whether there's a connection there, I don't know, that's something only the coaching staff and Jake know right now.

Taco John
01-26-2005, 03:10 AM
I've tried to come up with an answer to what is bugging me so much about Jake, and why I fell off the bandwagon. Aside from the obvious, him being the most intercepted quarterback in the game right now, this is what really bugs me: Even if we were to improve our runningback situation... our receiver situation... our offensive line situation... and our defense situation... we'd still have to worry about what Jake is going to do from game to game, whether it's throwing an off-handed interception, or overthrowing a route, or hesitating in the pocket, etc. It boils down to consistency for me, and from Jake, we just don't get that.

I love that he's a competitor. It's great that he responds to pressure. That's why we shouldn't feel bad about bringing in another quarterback to compete with him. Jake's feelings wont get too busted up. He can flip the other guy off or something. But by all means, let's give him something to respond to.

Cito Pelon
01-26-2005, 03:47 AM
or hesitating in the pocket.

That's the biggest problem the guy has right now. It's glaring. He's had nice pockets all year. Lepsis and Foster did a great job all year, there was really no teams that collapsed the pocket all year consistently. Jake this year just didn't identify, target, release. His feet are good, he has a quick release, he can make all the throws - accuracy was a problem this year, where he hasn't had that problem in the past, I can't explain that - maybe the hesitation can lead to innacuracy. Seen it before in the NFL.

But I'm not going to put the onus on Plummer for ruining a season. There's all kinds of blame to spread around, and really the idea that ShanaKubiak had from preseason on that rolling your QB out a lot is going to win any Championship be it divisional, conference or SB in the NFL is just total garbage. It's never worked in the NFL prior to 2004, and it basically is a losing strategy to start out with. It's a ridiculous strategy, it's Mickey Mouse, it's a cartoon fantasy of an offensive strategy.

This Bronc coaching staff pretty much had a Mickey Mouse plan to begin with, and then proved to be disfunctional this year, and there's pretty much no way to overcome that as a team.

DBroncos4life
01-26-2005, 04:12 AM
I just wanted to point out as well that in 3 of our 6 games we lost this year Elam missed 2 field goals that would have won the game and one more that would have tied the game. In the Jags game its his job during warm ups to know what the wind is doing to the ball so using logic from this board the lose was his fault. As taco pointed out that Jake owns his Ints well Elam OWNES his missed field goals. The Raiders game HIS kicked got blocked not Leaches, not Neil's and not Hamilton's. Goes on record as Elams missed kick. SD game he missed a kick BEFORE Plummers pick so whose mistake lost the game? Must be Plummers right?

Point is at some point someone didn't do something they get paid good money to do. Keep blaming this guy, keep find faults in others but when it comes right down to it the Broncos team lost not just one or two players.

fontaine
01-26-2005, 04:54 AM
I haven't seen anybody put all the blame on Plummer. The D line got no pressure. That's a huge problem, and it needs to be addressed. We are all in agreement that D line was a major problem.

But it's like some of these Plummer supporters get pissed when anybody mentions Plummer's share of the blame.

Excellent, why not stereotype and polarize Plummer supporters so they can all be defined by one sentence.

I can honestly say nobody here is "just" a Plummer supporter, because everyone here is, first and foremost, a Bronco Supporter.

People here disagree about the value Plummer brings to the offense, whether his good can offset the bad about his play. Making blanket statements about people who see a different viewpoint than yours is absurd.

gunns
01-26-2005, 05:28 AM
Sorry gunns Im still not one the same page as you again. Coaches coach and players play. Bill Belichick sucked with the Browns, why is that. Maybe he didn't have his master plan or the players didn't by into the system either way it takes everyone on the same page for teams to win. You could blame a kicker for pushing his kick right and thats what people remember but on the drive before a probowl db blew his coverage and the guy scored the game winning touchdown. Whose fault is it for the loss? Kicker gets waived so it must be his fault right? Must be cause he was the guy that got cut. Like I said teams win and teams lose.

You know I agree with you on the kicker part, I've stated it before. But to be a team each player has to play his part. You are going to tell me that at times plays weren't sent in by coaches that had no chance of succeeding? I'd say that's not being on the same page as your players for the team to win. Yes it does take a team to win or lose but if one's not doing their part, they are not playing as a part of the team. As with the kicker, the team shouldn't have put him in a position to have to win the game, maybe the coaches shouldn't put certain other players in that position either.

gunns
01-26-2005, 05:44 AM
Amen!! I wanted to give you rep, but they said it was too soon. Sry. I get so tired of those on this board that forget that football is a team sport, and it takes all 52 guys to be on the same sheet of music to get to the big dance (pun was intended). With the salary cap and the draft the way they are structured now, you will no longer see these teams that are dominate for an entire decade as before. They are up for 4 or 5 years, and then it crashes hard. Talk to me in 5 years, when NE is a 10-6 team fighting for the last playoff spot, and Jacksonville or Houston is the dominate team (just throwing names). That is the nature of the league, and that is why it is exciting enough to have a gazillion dollar Television contract (Too bad the NHL players cant get it through their skulls, the puckheads). People are going to complain about the QB here in Denver for the next 20 years, because of Elway. They did it in Pittsburgh, Dallas, San Diego, GB and Minnesota, when their HOF or successful QBs left the game. All of those teams crumbled into oblivion for MANY years, and yet Shanny has kept us competitive (only 1 non winning season), and Jake has guided us to the playoffs for two years in a row. However, no QB will be good enough, until this generation of Bronco fans have moved on and Elway's accomplishments have lost their luster. Even those Homers who are praying for Alex Smith (keep praying), will be all over him like white on rice by his 3d season, if he hasn't taken the Broncos to the Super Bowl. JMO from a guy who remembers the Broncos in the late 60's and 70's when they weren't all that great of a team.


Why is it that you state this is a team sport, win or lose, and then you go on to state Jake has guided us to the playoffs two years in a row. Like with the first game of the season this year, against KC, I'd say there were times that we got into the playoffs despite Jake. I'm sorry, you can wrongly say that those of us that criticize Jake do it because of Elway, I just think we have a higher standard than some other fans have for their teams. What are fans going to say when their team loses, replace the whole team?

-Slap-
01-26-2005, 06:48 AM
Excellent, why not stereotype and polarize Plummer supporters so they can all be defined by one sentence.

I can honestly say nobody here is "just" a Plummer supporter, because everyone here is, first and foremost, a Bronco Supporter.

People here disagree about the value Plummer brings to the offense, whether his good can offset the bad about his play. Making blanket statements about people who see a different viewpoint than yours is absurd.

Great post! I wish the Plummer Haters would get this through their thick skulls.

;)

Taco John
01-26-2005, 08:43 AM
Great post! I wish the Plummer Haters would get this through their thick skulls.

;)



LOL

Taco John
01-26-2005, 08:46 AM
I just wanted to point out as well that in 3 of our 6 games we lost this year Elam missed 2 field goals that would have won the game and one more that would have tied the game. In the Jags game its his job during warm ups to know what the wind is doing to the ball so using logic from this board the lose was his fault. As taco pointed out that Jake owns his Ints well Elam OWNES his missed field goals. The Raiders game HIS kicked got blocked not Leaches, not Neil's and not Hamilton's. Goes on record as Elams missed kick. SD game he missed a kick BEFORE Plummers pick so whose mistake lost the game? Must be Plummers right?

Point is at some point someone didn't do something they get paid good money to do. Keep blaming this guy, keep find faults in others but when it comes right down to it the Broncos team lost not just one or two players.



The blame roulette is a never-ending game. Eventually, the buck has to stop somewhere.

fontaine
01-26-2005, 08:52 AM
The blame roulette is a never-ending game. Eventually, the buck has to stop somewhere.

According to who? You?!
rofl

It's a nice saying and all TJ, but that doesn't mean it applies to a team sport where every player's performance is directly dependant on the rest of his team mates.

Tredici
01-26-2005, 08:52 AM
All this stuff about the Jags game is so funny to me.

The best play Jake made to keep the potential game winning drive alive was a 15 yard roughing the passer call on an incomplete 3rd down attempt.

Elam's job in Jacksonville? How about the ST's don't allow a 52 yard punt return setting up the Jags TD?

Hey, I just wanted to sing a chorus of the blame game, too...

Atlas
01-26-2005, 09:05 AM
Plummer isn't a bad QB BUT can he learn to take care of the ball better?? 5 out of his 8 seasons in the NFL he has thrown 20 ints or more. That is horrible. It really is.

winstoncup bronco
01-26-2005, 10:05 AM
I think the problem here is that some of the Plummer supporters act like anybody that questions Plummer is a Plummer basher.

Really? Good thing you don't do the same.

Right?

winstoncup bronco
01-26-2005, 10:16 AM
TJ, you've made your point. Over and over. You don't like Jake but desperately 'want to like him' You have that cute little avatar going over there, have said Jake's not the guy to get us to the SB, think we should get some guys in to groom and replace him, yadda, yadda, yadda.....

So please, do me and the rest of us a favor, when next year rolls around and if/when Plummer progresses with the rest of the offense and becomes the QB most of us here think he will be, don't give us the middle of the road routine, that you didn't say this, but you meant that, that you love the guy because you played against him in high scholl, or anything similar.

Your position here is that Plummer is more of a problem than a solution. Have the guts to stick with your convictions if they turn out to be true or not.

bendog
01-26-2005, 10:38 AM
??????

I guess you could put me in with TJ. I have no idea whether Jake will step up in the pocket, though I'm not giving the interior line the praise that some do. Jake was fine in Jax when the interior line was outmanned and dismantled. He missed Q with the handoff, though. We blame the defense for the Oakland loss, but I don't recall Jake bailing them out. He didn't step up in SD, quite the opposite. And, the record was that if RD got 100 we won. If not, prolly not. He showed squat in Indy.

I gave shanny the benefit of the doubt with SOB. I don't have any blind faith in him. Jake's got the skills to step it up. Does he have the mental makeup. I dunno. He's a competitor and not as much an asshole as SOB. But, he's got a history of bonehead game decisions. After seeing DC, IHOP, Jelly, Pittman, I'm more in the "show me" camp.

But, if Jake flops, I won't bash anybody but him, shanny and kubes. And, I'd give it 2-1 odds that he'll be better next year.

-Slap-
01-26-2005, 10:43 AM
I don't trust Jake and I never will trust him.

Of course its possible to win a Super Bowl with a quarterback like Jake Plummer. Stopgap QBs have won Rings and then were quickly replaced: DWilliams, Hostetler, Rypien and Dilfer.

I think its much more likely that Jake will kill us in a playoff game with a lefthanded interception from his end zone before we ever get to another Roman Numeral game, though.

bronco militia
01-26-2005, 10:45 AM
.

But, if Jake flops, I won't bash anybody but him, shanny and kubes. .

I agree 100%...but I'm already bashing the three of them before next year rolls around.....

6 years and counting ~Popps~

Taco John
01-26-2005, 10:53 AM
TJ, you've made your point. Over and over. You don't like Jake but desperately 'want to like him' You have that cute little avatar going over there, have said Jake's not the guy to get us to the SB, think we should get some guys in to groom and replace him, yadda, yadda, yadda.....

So please, do me and the rest of us a favor, when next year rolls around and if/when Plummer progresses with the rest of the offense and becomes the QB most of us here think he will be, don't give us the middle of the road routine, that you didn't say this, but you meant that, that you love the guy because you played against him in high scholl, or anything similar.

Your position here is that Plummer is more of a problem than a solution. Have the guts to stick with your convictions if they turn out to be true or not.


Whatever. What a BS statement.

Plummer has earned any criticism that he's getting. None of this is undue. My position is that right now, he IS more of a problem for this team than a solution. If he proves that wrong next year, what would be the point of sticking with this? He'll have earned a new reputation. The point is, it's up to him, not up to me.

You want to talk about me doing the rest of us a favor... How about Jake doing us a favor and finally breaking the mold that he's cast himself into by being the most intercepted quarterback in the league right now. I'm not the one to blame for all of those interceptions. And I don't think that his teammates are the ones to blame for them either, though that's all anyone has done for the guy since he first started throwing them in Arizona.

If Jake turns it around this year, I'll be like anyone else, and be happy that he's done it. But my days of being a blind homer for Jake are done. Now my support is based on his performance, because potential doesn't get it done anymore. We're not playing with the house money. Anything we give him now is going to haunt us for years if he doesn't pan out.

I don't think asking Jake to step it up from this awful season he had is unreasonable. And yes, anytime you lead the league in interceptions, you had an awful season, despite what you may have accomplished statswise. You can't turn over the ball as much as Jake does and expect to be consistent winners. That's not how it usually works out in the pro game.

Jason in LA
01-26-2005, 11:06 AM
Excellent, why not stereotype and polarize Plummer supporters so they can all be defined by one sentence.

I can honestly say nobody here is "just" a Plummer supporter, because everyone here is, first and foremost, a Bronco Supporter.

People here disagree about the value Plummer brings to the offense, whether his good can offset the bad about his play. Making blanket statements about people who see a different viewpoint than yours is absurd.

It's pretty much true for some posters. There are posters that act like people that question Plummer are bashing him. My point in this thread hasn't been to bash him. I haven't said he should be dumped. I've said that he should be the starter next year. TJ has said the samething. So why are we made out to be Plummer bashers? Would a Plummer basher want Plummer as the QB next year?

Mile High Shack
01-26-2005, 11:07 AM
TJ is made out to be a plummer basher b/c of his avatar :), I didn't see that kind of crap when he had/has his love affair with Grieseball

Jason in LA
01-26-2005, 11:13 AM
TJ, you've made your point. Over and over. You don't like Jake but desperately 'want to like him' You have that cute little avatar going over there, have said Jake's not the guy to get us to the SB, think we should get some guys in to groom and replace him, yadda, yadda, yadda.....

So please, do me and the rest of us a favor, when next year rolls around and if/when Plummer progresses with the rest of the offense and becomes the QB most of us here think he will be, don't give us the middle of the road routine, that you didn't say this, but you meant that, that you love the guy because you played against him in high scholl, or anything similar.

Your position here is that Plummer is more of a problem than a solution. Have the guts to stick with your convictions if they turn out to be true or not.

You are acting like the poeple that are questioning Plummer aren't rooting for him. I'm rooting for Plummer to do well. So is TJ. We both want him to be the Plummer of '03. So you can save your "I told you so" if Plummer does well next year. We are all rooting for that. But some of us don't want the Broncos to put all their eggs in one basket.

If Plummer does well next year, which I hope he does, there won't be any explaination from me. Because I'm rooting for him to do well. Just like I rooted for Griese until the day he got the boot (I was happy to see him get the boot).

Popps
01-26-2005, 11:15 AM
Like said, Taco. If you wouldn't have spent two years vehemently defending one of the least talented QBs the Broncos have ever employed, your thoughts on this matter might carry a bit more weight.

Anyone with half of a memory has to get a real kick out of your Plummer attacks.(What, Plummer doesn't need a "dominant left tackle?")

A guy had a couple of garbage seasons, gets drunk and trips over his dog... and you defend him.

A guy breaks a few of Elway's records and takes us to the playoffs two years in a row, you bash him.

Makes sense.

You know, if Plummer was just a better QB, we would have won that game 50-49.

DBroncos4life
01-26-2005, 11:23 AM
The blame roulette is a never-ending game. Eventually, the buck has to stop somewhere.



Im glad to see that you still think the blame should just go to one person even after I pointed out to you that Elam had a part in 3 of the teams 6 losses. He makes those kickes Denver is a sure 12-4 and could have been 13-3 but again Plummer must have got some of his sweat in Elams eyes on the side line making it again Denver Plummers fault. (New name of the Team).

DBroncos4life
01-26-2005, 11:31 AM
Whatever. What a BS statement.

Plummer has earned any criticism that he's getting. None of this is undue. My position is that right now, he IS more of a problem for this team than a solution. If he proves that wrong next year, what would be the point of sticking with this? He'll have earned a new reputation. The point is, it's up to him, not up to me.

You want to talk about me doing the rest of us a favor... How about Jake doing us a favor and finally breaking the mold that he's cast himself into by being the most intercepted quarterback in the league right now. I'm not the one to blame for all of those interceptions. And I don't think that his teammates are the ones to blame for them either, though that's all anyone has done for the guy since he first started throwing them in Arizona.

If Jake turns it around this year, I'll be like anyone else, and be happy that he's done it. But my days of being a blind homer for Jake are done. Now my support is based on his performance, because potential doesn't get it done anymore. We're not playing with the house money. Anything we give him now is going to haunt us for years if he doesn't pan out.

I don't think asking Jake to step it up from this awful season he had is unreasonable. And yes, anytime you lead the league in interceptions, you had an awful season, despite what you may have accomplished statswise. You can't turn over the ball as much as Jake does and expect to be consistent winners. That's not how it usually works out in the pro game.



Thats a load of crap. The only thing awful about his season was the 20 picks which only the one against SD really cost us the game, (Not if Elam makes that kick). All you see is Int's, not wins, not playoff trips, not yards, and touchdowns. He was the first Qb to start everydown for us and he set a team low in sacks. He BROKE 3 team records and TIED another and you cant see past Int's. Pretty sad.

Taco John
01-26-2005, 11:38 AM
Like said, Taco. If you wouldn't have spent two years vehemently defending one of the least talented QBs the Broncos have ever employed, your thoughts on this matter might carry a bit more weight.

Anyone with half of a memory has to get a real kick out of your Plummer attacks.(What, Plummer doesn't need a "dominant left tackle?")

A guy had a couple of garbage seasons, gets drunk and trips over his dog... and you defend him.

A guy breaks a few of Elway's records and takes us to the playoffs two years in a row, you bash him.

Makes sense.

You know, if Plummer was just a better QB, we would have won that game 50-49.

I think the situations between Brian Griese and Jake Plummer are very different. Jake has little to complain about with regards to his offensive line. Matt Lepsis has done an admirable job on the left end. Jake also has never had to play a game in November with the 6th, 7th, and 8th wide receiver on the depth chart.

But even more, I'm being consistent. I'm not asking to get rid of Jake. I also didn't ask to get rid of Brian. With both guys, my mantra was to bring in competition. Some people took that as me loving Brian. They got it all wrong. What I wanted was competition, and I said so over and over and over again.

And if Plummer was a better QB, the Colts would have never had the opportunity to score 49 points.

bendog
01-26-2005, 11:38 AM
TJ is made out to be a plummer basher b/c of his avatar :), I didn't see that kind of crap when he had/has his love affair with Grieseball
Aw jeez, who's gonna clean up this mess?

Taco John
01-26-2005, 11:46 AM
Thats a load of crap. The only thing awful about his season was the 20 picks which only the one against SD really cost us the game, (Not if Elam makes that kick).


ROFL!

Only ONE of TWNETY picks cost us? You've got to be kidding me.


All you see is Int's, not wins, not playoff trips, not yards, and touchdowns.

Yep. Wins are meaningless if none of them are in the playoffs. Yards are meaningless, unless they come in the playoffs. Touchdowns are meaningless unless they come in the playoffs. Interceptions, however, have meaning. They're what keep the other three stats from meeting with their potential.


He was the first Qb to start everydown for us and he set a team low in sacks. He BROKE 3 team records and TIED another and you cant see past Int's. Pretty sad.

So? What does any of it mean if we can't win a playoff game? I don't watch this game for stats. I don't invest my heart into the Broncos to just make it to the wildcard game and call it a good season.

I don't know why people think that Jake should go free from criticism when he lead the league in interceptions. I don't understand why people wouldn't want to bring in competition in case he does it again.

Eye Patch
01-26-2005, 12:02 PM
I don't know why people think that Jake should go free from criticism when he lead the league in interceptions. I don't understand why people wouldn't want to bring in competition in case he does it again.

actually he has lead the league in interceptions for 5 of his 8 year career.

at least he's consistent.

but he just needs more time to learn the system... yup... Oh and he has heart too... I watch TV